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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 7 - Colorado River Basin Region

Water Body Name:	New River (Imperial County)
Water Body ID:	CAR7231000019990205102948
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	6090	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	Other
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. The New River was originally listed in 2002. Line of Evidence No. 4665 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is instead used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26874 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4665 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of 1,2,4- Trimethylbenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to verify the original Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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.No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters that meets the requirements of the Listing Policy could be found. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6090, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4665

Pollutant:

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6090, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21380

Pollutant:

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the 0.5 ug/l reporting limit (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The waters shall be free from substances that may be discharged into the (New) River as a result of human activity in concentrations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life or which may significantly impair the beneficial uses of such waters (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of 1,2,4- trimethylbenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Nine water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 12/2007 through 7/2008. One sample was collected once a month except for 12/2007. Two samples were collected in 12/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6090, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21381

Pollutant:

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twenty-one water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 10/2007 through 9/2008. Samples were not collected in 12/2007. Two samples were collected once a month except for 3/2008 and 9/2008. Only one sample was collected in those months.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6090, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26874

Pollutant:

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 1/1997 through 1/2007. Samples were not collected in the months 10/1999-1/2000, 3/2005, 7/2005, 9/2005, 10/2005, 7/2006-10/2006. In general two water samples were collected three hours apart once a month, except for 12/2005 and 6/2006 when only one sample was collected. Every third or fourth month (quarterly), eight samples were collected once every three hours over a twenty-four hour period. This lasted from 1/1997 through until 10/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6090, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26928

Pollutant:

1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA, where the All-American Canal crosses over the river, where Highway 98 crosses over the river, where Lyons Road crosses over the river, where Even Hewes Highway crosses over the river, at Drop 2, and at the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Thirty-nine water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 12/2004 through 9/2005. Samples were collected every month from the International Boundary in Calexico, CA, and where Even Hewes Highway crosses over the river. Samples were collected from where the All-American Canal crosses over the river, where Highway 98 crosses over the river, and where Lyons Road crosses over the river in 1/2005, 2/2005, 7/2005, and 9/2005. Samples were collected from Drop 2, and at the outlet to the Salton Sea in 12/2004, 8/2005, and 9/2005. An extra sample was collected from the outlet to the Salton Sea in 7/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6090, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29836

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from water bodies located in the Colorado River Basin- Region 7. May 2002 - May 2004.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Bromobenzene, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene, Cumene, n-Propylbenzene, n-Butylbenzene, sec-Butylbenzene, or tert-Butylbenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, at the Even Hewes Highway overpass near Seeley, CA, Drop 2, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fifteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at the International boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October. An extra sample was collected from the International Boundary location in July of 2003. At Even Hewes and Drop 2 samples were collected in May and October of 2002 only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	6092	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chloroform
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Chloroform consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. Line of Evidence No. 4666 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is instead used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26875 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4666 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of Chloroform include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. There were a total of four hundred and fifty-six water samples collected. When comparing the data to the USEPA NRWQC for human health, there were no exceedances. No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of chloroform for the protection of animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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 441 water samples exceeded the United States Environmental Protection Agency National Recommended Ambient Water Quality criteria used to interpret the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of chloroform for the protection of animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4666

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21367

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USEPA ambient water quality criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (NRWQC) of 5.7 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms (USEPA, 2002).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21368

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USEPA ambient water quality criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21369

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two water samples were collected from 5/2008 through 6/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USEPA ambient water quality criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Two water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 5/2008 through 6/2008. One sample was collected once a month.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 2008b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Water Quality Monitoring of the New River at Mexicali and International Boundary. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26875

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USEPA NRWQC (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26929

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USEPA NRWQC (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6092, Chloroform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29838

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chloroform, Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, or 1,1-Dichloropropene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	6326	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Pesticides
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	Change from general pollutant to specific pollutant listing (e.g. metals to copper)
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list in favor of listings for specific pesticides on the section 303(d) list. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 4392 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The listing has been cited as "pesticides" rather than listing for specifc pollutants responsible for the impairment. There is no guideline for evaluating the general pollutant "Pesticides" and it cannot be determined if the pollutant is likely to cause or contribute to a toxic effect. The New River is currently listed on the 303(d) list as impaired by the six specific pesticides: Chlordane, Chlorpyrifos, DDT, Diazinon, Dieldrin, and Toxaphene. Each of these specific pesticides have lines of evidence to support their listings. As new data is collected and assessed these and other specific pesticides may be either listed or delisted. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. A water quality guideline for the general pollutant "pesticides" is not available that complies with the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Water quality guidelines for specific pesticides are available that comply with section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. 2. The New River is currently listed on the 303(d) list as impaired by six specific pesticides. 3. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that this water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list in favor of listings for specific pesticides.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6326, Pesticides	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4392

Pollutant:

Pesticides

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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	6327	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Toluene
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Toluene consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. Line of Evidence No. 4393 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is instead used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26878 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4393 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of Toluene include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. There were a total of four hundred and sixty water samples collected. When comparing the data collected to the CTR criteria protecting human health, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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 460 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria used to interpret the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26878

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents, 2600 ug/l 1,4 Dichlorobenzene, 200,000 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26932

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21376

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two water samples were collected from 5/2008 through 6/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Two water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 5/2008 through 6/2008. One sample was collected once a month.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 2008b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Water Quality Monitoring of the New River at Mexicali and International Boundary. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21375

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21374

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nineteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Nineteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the international Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Another sample was collected from the International Boundary location in 7/2003. The rest of the locations were sampled twice in May and october of 2002

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 6327, Toluene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4393

Pollutant:

Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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	6322	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	meta-para xylenes
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess meta,para-xylenes consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. Line of Evidence No. 4387 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is instead used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26876 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4387 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of meta,para-xylenes include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. There were a total of four hundred and forty-one water samples collected. When comparing the data to the drinking water secondary MCL for recreational uses, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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 441 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL used to interpret the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6322, meta-para xylenes	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4387

Pollutant:

meta-para xylenes

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6322, meta-para xylenes	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26930

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the SMCL (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6322, meta-para xylenes	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26876

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the SMCL (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6322, meta-para xylenes	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21373

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two water samples were collected from 5/2008 through 6/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Two water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 5/2008 through 6/2008. One sample was collected once a month.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 2008b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Water Quality Monitoring of the New River at Mexicali and International Boundary. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6322, meta-para xylenes	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21370

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6322, meta-para xylenes	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21372

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.


DECISION ID	6323	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	o-Xylene
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess o-xylene consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. Line of Evidence No. 4389 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is used instead to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26876 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4389 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of o-xylene include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. There were a total of four hundred and forty-one water samples collected. When compared to the drinking water secondary MCL for recreational uses, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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 441 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29863

Pollutant:

o-Xylene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 10/2002 through 5/2004 at 3 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of o-Xylene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, Drop 2, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten water samples were collected. Water samples were collected from all three sampling locations in 10/2002. In 4/2003, 11/2003, and 5/2004 samples were collected from the International Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations only. In 7/2003 a sample was collected from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26930

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the SMCL (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26876

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the SMCL (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21372

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21373

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two water samples were collected from 5/2008 through 6/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Two water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 5/2008 through 6/2008. One sample was collected once a month.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 2008b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Water Quality Monitoring of the New River at Mexicali and International Boundary. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4389

Pollutant:

o-Xylene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6323, o-Xylene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21370

Pollutant:

Xylenes (total) (mixed)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.02 mg/l total xylenes for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).

Guideline Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.


DECISION ID	6324	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	Other
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess p-Cymene consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. Line of Evidence No. 4390 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is used instead to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26877 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4390 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of p-Cymene include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of p-Cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to verify the original Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of p-Cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy could be found. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6324, p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21377

Pollutant:

p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the 0.5 ug/l reporting limit (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The waters shall be free from substances that may be discharged into the (New) River as a result of human activity in concentrations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life or which may significantly impair the beneficial uses of such waters (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of p-cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6324, p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21378

Pollutant:

p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the 0.5 ug/l reporting limit (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The waters shall be free from substances that may be discharged into the (New) River as a result of human activity in concentrations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life or which may significantly impair the beneficial uses of such waters (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of p-cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6324, p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26877

Pollutant:

p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The waters shall be free from substances that may be discharged into the (New) River as a result of human activity in concentrations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life or which may significantly impair the beneficial uses of such waters (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of p-cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6324, p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4390

Pollutant:

p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6324, p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29837

Pollutant:

2-Chlorotoluene | 4-Chlorotoluene | p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Chlorotoluene, 4-Chlorotoluene, or p-Cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 6324, p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26931

Pollutant:

p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The waters shall be free from substances that may be discharged into the (New) River as a result of human activity in concentrations which are toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life or which may significantly impair the beneficial uses of such waters (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of p-cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.


DECISION ID	6325	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Reason for Delisting:	State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess p-Dichlorobenzene consistent with Listing Policy section 4.1. Line of Evidence No. 4391 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is used instead to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The data in Line of Evidence No. 26878 is the original data set used to list the New River in 2002, because of this Line of Evidence No. 4391 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. Potential sources of p-Dichlorobenzene include Industrial Point and Out-of-State sources. There were a total of four hundred and sixty water samples collected. When comparing the data to CTR criteria for protecting human health, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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 460 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria used to interpret the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4391

Pollutant:

p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26932

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-nine water samples were collected from 12/2004 through 9/2005 at 7 locations in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRRWQCB, 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for sampling volatile organic compounds in the New River for TMDL Development. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26878

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

370

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy water samples were collected from 1/1997 through 1/2007 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2009).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and from the New River VOC TMDL Development Monitoring Program in January 2009.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21376

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two water samples were collected from 5/2008 through 6/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Two water samples were generally collected and analyzed monthly from 5/2008 through 6/2008. One sample was collected once a month.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 2008b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Water Quality Monitoring of the New River at Mexicali and International Boundary. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21375

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-one water samples were collected from 10/2007 through 9/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6325, p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

21374

Pollutant:

1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | Toluene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from 12/2007 through 7/2008 at 1 location in the river. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2008).

Data Reference:

Data compiled from the Regional Board New River/Mexicali Sanitation Program and New River TMDL Development and Implementation Monitoring Program in October 2008

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary in Calexico, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 1996).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Workplan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring the New River System. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.


DECISION ID	4174	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chlordane
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Chlordane consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. Line of Evidence No. 2938 from 2006 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because the reporting limit was greater than the chronic maximum concentration. According to 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy, whenever the sample results are below the quantitation limit, and the quantitation limit is above the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the results shall not be used in the analysis. The data in Line of Evidence No. 2938 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of fourteen water samples collected. When compared to the CTR 2.4 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 5.6 ug/kg threshold for consumption, there were 28 exceedances out of 43 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in three fish tissue samples Chlordane was not analyzed. When compared to the 100 ug/kg threshold, there were 5 exceedances out of the 43 fish tissue samples. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 28 out of 43 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4174, Chlordane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5577

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from water bodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board. Sacramento, CA.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Forty-one fish fillet samples of channel catfish, carp, flathead catfish, tilapia, spiny soft shelled turtle, and yellow bullhead were collected. Fifteen channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979, (4)1980, 1981, (2)1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1991, 1995 and 1997-98. Five channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1988, 1990, 1992-93. Ten carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1981-86, 1990, 1991, 1993, and 1994. Five carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One flathead catfish single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-92. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1987. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Five whole fish samples of red swamp crayfish, tilapia and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-1980. One tilapia single whole fish sample was collected in the year 1984. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite sample was collected in the year 1985. Exceedances were found in samples collected from 7/31/1990 through 11/02/1994.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4174, Chlordane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5387

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Three fish fillet samples could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the samples. The 38 fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 26 fish fillet samples and 2 whole fish samples collected at two locations exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. At the Westmorland location the exceedances were found in; 9 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 5/09/1980, 5/24/1981, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 10/10/1985, 9/03/1987, 10/27/1995, and 11/20/1997; 4 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 11/18/1988, 8/03/1990, 9/20/1992, and 9/29/1993; 6 Carp fillet composite samples collected on 5/24/1981, 4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 5/24/1984, 10/09/1985, and 10/15/1986; 1 carp single fish fillet sample collected on 12/09/1999. At the International Boundary location exceedances were found in; 4 carp fillet composite samples collected on 7/31/1990, 12/18/1991, 6/16/1993, and 11/02/1994; 2 carp single fish fillet samples collected on 7/20/1989, and 12/10/1997; 1 sailfin molly whole fish composite sample collected on 10/01/1985, and; 1 tilapia single whole fish sample collected on 5/17/1984 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 5.6 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Forty-one fish fillet samples of channel catfish, carp, flathead catfish, tilapia, spiny soft shelled turtle, and yellow bullhead were collected. Fifteen channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979, (4)1980, 1981, (2)1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1991, 1995 and 1997-98. Five channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1988, 1990, 1992-93. Ten carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1981-86, 1990, 1991, 1993, and 1994. Five carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One flathead catfish single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-92. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1987. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Five whole fish samples of red swamp crayfish, tilapia and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-1980. One tilapia single whole fish sample was collected in the year 1984. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite sample was collected in the year 1985. The exceedances were found in samples collected from 5/09/1980 through 12/10/1997.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4174, Chlordane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha Endosulfan, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor epoxide (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4174, Chlordane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2938

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. Of the 4 samples, all samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.025 ppb. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 2.4 ppb and CTR: freshwater chronic maximum = 0.0043 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	5461	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Chlorpyrifos consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. The results of Line of Evidence No. 2954 are not included in the Final Use Rating because the data contained in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No 4863. This prevents data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of twenty-nine water samples collected. When compared to the CA Department of Fish and Game 0.02 ug/l threshold for aquatic life there were 6 exceedances out of 15 acceptable water samples taken, fourteen of the water samples were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment. There were a total of forty -six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 1000 ug/kg threshold for consumption there were no exceedances out of 42 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in four of the fish tissue samples Chlorpyrifos was not analyzed. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 6 of 15 water samples exceeded the California Department of Fish and Game evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 5461, Chlorpyrifos	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5487

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Four fish fillet samples could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the sample. The 37 fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, none exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 10000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5461, Chlorpyrifos	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2954

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Numeric data generated from 4 water samples from SWAMP and 5 water samples taken by USGS. Two of nine samples exceeded the evaluation guideline (SWAMP, 2004; LeBlanc, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline from the Department of Fish and Game of 0.014 ug/L used (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Five stations were sampled. All were situated along the New River from the international boundary with Mexico to the outlet (mouth) of New River in the Salton Sea. Exceedances were observed at the Evans Hewes Highway and the Rice Drain stations.

Temporal Representation:

Four samples were taken during the spring (May) and the fall (October) of 2002. No exceedances were observed. Of the five samples collected in April 2003, two exceeded the evaluation guideline.

Environmental Conditions:

The New River flows from Mexico through the Imperial Valley in the Salton Sea. Most of the water flowing through it comes from agricultural return flows.

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5461, Chlorpyrifos	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4863

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seventeen water samples were taken at three locations on the river. Fourteen water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The three acceptible water quality samples were collected on 4/15/2003, and 10/05/2004 from 3 locations along the New River. One sample from the outlet to the Salton Sea location exceeded the CDFG Hazardous Assessment Criteria. The exceedence was found a the sample collected on 10/05/2004 (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Hazardous Assessment Criteria of 0.02 ug/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, at the Even Hewes Highway overpass near Seeley, CA, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Seventeen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, usually in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea site. Two additional samples were collected from these two locations in 4/2003. The Even Hewes Highway overpass near Seeley, CA location was sampled once in 4/2003. The exceedence was found in a sample collected on 10/05/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 5461, Chlorpyrifos	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5182

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twelve water quality samples were taken at 4 locations along the river, generally collected from 9/13/2006 through 4/18/2007. Of these total samples , 5 exceeded the CDFG Hazardous Assessment Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 10/14/2006, 10/15/2006, 10/16/2006, 2/14/2007, and 3/13/2007 from all four locations (Orlando et al, 2008).

Data Reference:

"Pesticides in Water and Suspended Sediment of the Alamo and New Rivers, Imperial Valley/Salton Sea Basin, California, 2006-07". U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Final Report prepared in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), delivered to the CRBRWQCB. Palm Desert, CA.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Hazardous Assessment Criteria of 0.02 ug/l (1 hr. ave.) for freshwater aquatic life use protection (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: at the Outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA, downstream of Drop 4 near Brawley, CA, at the Even Hewes Highway overpass near Seeley, CA, and at the International Boundary with Mexico.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/13/2006 through 4/18/2007. Samples were collected from the outlet to the Salton Sea monthly from 9/2006 through 11/2006 and 2/2007 through 4/2007. The three other locations were sampled only twice, once in 10/2006 and another time in 3/2007. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 10/14/2006 through 3/13/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Investigators used USGS methods for sample collection and analysis. Lab analysis was done by the USGS Laboratories in Sacramento, CA. All methods were approved by State Board QA officer (USGS, 2007b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan, Imperial Valley Pesticides TMDL Assessment Studies. Water Science Center. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	4331	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Copper
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Copper consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. There were 6 water samples that exceeded the water quality objectives. When compared to the CTR hardness dependant threshold for aquatic life, there were six exceedances out of 128 water samples taken over all the sampling years. When compared to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 15000 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances out of 30 total water samples taken. No sediment samples exceed the water quality objective. When compared to the sediment quality guideline 149 mg/kg threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances out of 14 total sediment samples taken over all the sampling years. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, six of 128 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4331, Copper	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4921

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations in the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and at the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fifteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October. An additional sample was collected from the International Boundary location in 7/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4331, Copper	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5048

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen water quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USFWS Biological Effects Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Effects Criteria of 15 mg/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (USDOI, 1998).

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4331, Copper	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2922

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 to December 2003 on the New River at the International Boundary. Of the 98 monthly samples, 6 were in exceedance of the chronic criteria and 0 were in exceedance of the acute criteria. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB at three locations on the New River from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. None of the 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999 on the New River. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c) (USEPA, 2007).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average based on hardness and freshwater acute maximum based on hardness.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. For the 6 samples, they were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, and at both the International Drain and Puente Madero.

Temporal Representation:

The 98 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 to December 2003. The 6 samples were collected on 6 days from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996, and the 9 samples were collected monthly from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4331, Copper	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5278

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-seven water samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Forty-one water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 16 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 5/1984. Of all these samples, none exceed the USFWS Biological Effects Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the National Water Information System (NWIS) Water Quality database. 1961-2005.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Bilogical Effects Criteria of 15 mg/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (USDOI, 1998).

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Fifty-seven samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 2/1985. Twenty-nine samples were collected from 1973-1979, and 28 samples were collected from 1980-1985.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Field measurements: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A6. In United States Geological Survey (USGS). Variously dated. National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1-A9, available online at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4331, Copper	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5322

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three sediment quality samples were taken at 3 locations along the river. The samples were generally collected from 11/1973 through 4/2003. Of these total samples, none exceeded the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 149 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., USGS Station No. 330559115385601 at Lack Road near Calipatria, Ca, and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. One sample was collected on 11/07/1973, another sample was collected on 10/24/01, and another sample was collected 4/14/03.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4331, Copper	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations in the along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene , 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4403	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Eleven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess DDT consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. Line of Evidence No. 2935 from 2006 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because the reporting limit was greater than the chronic maximum concentration. According to 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy, whenever the sample results are below the quantitation limit, and the quantitation limit is above the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the results shall not be used in the analysis. The data in Line of Evidence No. 2935 will not be used in the Final Use Rating. The results of fish tissue Line of Evidence No. 2936 are not included in the Final Use Rating because the data contained in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No. 5388. This prevents data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of one hundred and nine water samples collected. When compared to the CTR 0.00059 ug/l threshold for human health, there were 54 exceedances out of 54 acceptable water samples taken, in fifty-five water samples the samples results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment or the data was not assessed using this criteria. When compared to the CTR 1.1 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances out of 82 total water samples taken, in twenty-seven water samples the samples results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment or the data was not assessed using this criteria. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 21 ug/kg threshold for consumption, there were 42 exceedances out of 45 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in one fish tissue sample DDT was not analyzed. When compared to the NAS 1000 ug/kg threshold for aquatic life, there were 12 exceedances out of 45 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in one fish tissue sample DDT was not analyzed. In addtion, the DDT degradates p,p'-DDD, and p,p'-DDE were found in water samples. There were 67 water samples that exceeded p,p'-DDD water quality objectives. When compared to the CTR 0.00084 ug/l threshold for human health, there were 67 exceedances out of 67 total water samples taken over all the sampling years. There were 59 water samples that exceeded p,p'-DDE water quality objectives. When compared to the 0.00059 ug/l threshold for human health, there were 59 exceedances out of 59 total water samples taken over all the sampling years. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 54 out of 54 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. In addtion, the DDT degradates p,p'-DDD and p,p'-DDE were found in water samples in concentrations that exceeded California Toxics Rule criteria and exceeded the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5184

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twelve water quality samples were taken at 4 locations along the river, generally collected from 9/13/2006 through 4/18/2007. Of these total samples , none exceeded the CTR Criteria (Orlando et al, 2008).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1.1 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Twelve samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/13/2006 through 4/18/2007. Samples were collected from the outlet to the Salton Sea monthly from 9/06 through 11/06 and 2/07 through 4/07. The three other locations were sampled only twice, once in 10/2006 and another time in 3/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan, Imperial Valley Pesticides TMDL Assessment Studies. Water Science Center. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5585

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 1000 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5388

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. One fish fillet samples could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the sample. The 40 fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 40 fish fillet samples and 2 whole fish samples collected at two locations exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. At the Westmorland location the exceedances were found in; 14 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 3/13/1979, (3)5/09/1980, 5/24/1981, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 10/10/1985, 9/03/1987, 8/15/1991, 10/27/1995, 11/20/1997, and 11/11/1998; 5 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 6/22/1978, 11/18/1988, 8/03/1990, 9/20/1992, and 9/29/1993; 6 carp fillet composite samples collected on 5/24/1981, 4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 5/24/1984, 10/09/1985, and 10/15/1986; 3 carp single fish fillet samples collected on 6/22/1978, 10/27/1994, and 12/09/1999; 1 flathead catfish single fish fillet sample collected on 10/29/1989; 1 tilapia fish fillet composite sample collected on 11/01/1996, and; 2 spiny soft shelled turtles collected on 8/15/1991, and 9/20/1992. At the International Boundary location exceedances were found in; 4 carp fillet composite samples collected on 7/31/1990, 12/18/1991, 6/16/1993, and 11/02/1994; 2 carp single fish fillet sample collected on 7/20/1989, and 12/10/1997; 1 yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample collected on 7/20/1989; 1 spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample collected on 5/12/1987; 1 sailfin molly whole fish composite sample collected on 10/01/1985, and; 1 tilapia single whole fish sample collected on 5/17/1984 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 21 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Forty-one fish fillet samples of channel catfish, carp, flathead catfish, tilapia, spiny soft shelled turtle, and yellow bullhead were collected. Fifteen channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979, (4)1980, 1981, (2)1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1991, 1995 and 1997-98. Five channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1988, 1990, 1992-93. Ten carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1981-86, 1990, 1991, 1993, and 1994. Five carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One flathead catfish single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-92. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1987. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Five whole fish samples of red swamp crayfish, tilapia and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-1980. One tilapia single whole fish sample was collected in the year 1984. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite sample was collected in the year 1985. The exceedances were found in samples collected from 6/22/1978 through 12/09/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5241

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighty-one samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Twenty-seven water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 54 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 9/1992. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1.1 ug/l p,p'-DDT for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca, and USGS Station No. 10255502 at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5200

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighty-one water samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Twenty-seven water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 54 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, 54 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 5/30/1979 at 2 locations (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 0.00059 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca, and USGS Station No.10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were generally collected from 8/69 through 5/79. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 5/30/1979.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5198

Pollutant:

p,p'-DDE

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighty-one water samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Twenty-five water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 56 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, 56 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 4/01/1992 at 2 locations (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 0.00059 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca, and USGS Station No.10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Eighty-one samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Four samples were collected in 1969, 76 samples were collected from 1970-1979, no samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1999. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 4/02/1992.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5196

Pollutant:

p,p'-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighty-one water samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Fourteen water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 67 acceptable water quality sample were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, 67 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 4/02/1992 at 2 locations (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 0.00084 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca, and USGS Station No.10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Eighty-one samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Four samples were collected in 1969, 76 samples were collected from 1970-1979, 0 samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1999. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 4/02/1992.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5024

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sixteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 3 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1.1 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Sixteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the international Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Two extra samples were collect in April 2003 from these two locations. The Even Hewes location was sampled in April 2003 only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4858

Pollutant:

p,p'-DDE

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seventeen water samples were taken at three locations on the river. Fourteen water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The three acceptable water samples were collected on 5/06/2002, 10/02/2002, and 5/04/2004 at 1 location along the New River, near the outlet to the Salton Sea. Of these total samples, 3 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/06/2002, 10/02/2002, and 5/04/2004. (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.00059 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Seventeen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, usually in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Two additional samples were collected in 4/2003 from these two locations. The location at Even Hewes Highway overpass was sampled once in 4/2003. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 5/06/2002 through 5/04/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2936

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eleven out of 13 samples exceeded. A total of 7 filet composite and individual samples of channel catfish, 5 filet composite and individual samples of carp, and one filet composite of tilapia were collected. Channel catfish were collected from 1992-99 and 2001-02. Carp were collected 1993-4, 1997, and 1999. Tilapia were collected in 1996. The guideline was exceeded in all samples except tilapia and a 1997 individual carp sample. This addresses DDT and related pollutants (TSMP, 2002).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River Basin RWQCB Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be presenting concentration that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

100 ng/g (OEHHA Screening Value; Brodberg, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Two stations, one station was located at the gauging station about one mile downstream of the Lack Road Bridge near Westmorland and the second station was located near the international boundary.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected annually 1992-99 and 2001-02.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1992-93 and 1994-95 Data Reports.

Environmental Chemistry Quality Assurance and Data Report for the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program, 1996-2000. Department of Fish and Game.

Environmental Chemistry Quality Assurance and Data Report for the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program, 2001-2002. Department of Fish and Game.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4403, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2935

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. None of the 4 samples exceeded the acute maximum, however 3 samples were below the detection limit (0.018 ppb) and 1 was above (0.13 ppb) the chronic maximum (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 1.1 ppb for 4,4'DDT and freshwater chronic maximum = 0.001 ppb for 4,4'DDT as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	5416	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Diazinon
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Diazinon consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. Line of Evidence No. 2953 is a placeholder line of evidence, it is used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The results of Line of Evidence No. 2953 are not included in the Final Use Rating because the data contained in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No. 4868. This prevents data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of one hundred and one water samples collected. When compared to the CA Department of Fish and Game 0.16 ug/l threshold for aquatic life there were 22 exceedances out of 92 acceptable water samples taken, nine water sample result were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 300 ug/kg threshold for consumption, there were no exceedances out of 42 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in four fish tissue samples Diazinon was not analyzed. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 22 of 92 water samples exceeded the California Department of Fish and Game evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 5416, Diazinon	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5206

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seventy-one water quality samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Nine water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 62 acceptable water quality samples were collected from 9/1970 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, 16 exceeded the CDFG Hazardous Assessment Criteria (USGS, 2007). The exceedences were found in samples collected from 11/17/1970, 1/18/1971, 8/26/75, 9/18/1975, 10/07/1975, 11/19/1975, 12/09/1975, 1/28,1976, 3/17/1976, 3/22/1977, 9/13/1977, 11/08/1977, 12/13/1977 from the 2 locations (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Hazardous Assessment Criteria of 0.16 ug/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca, and USGS Station No.10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Seventy-one samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/1970 through 4/1992. Sixty-nine samples were collected from 1970-1979, 1 sample was collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1992. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 11/17/1970 through 12/13/1977.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5416, Diazinon	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5488

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 300 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5416, Diazinon	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2953

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Numeric data generated from 4 water samples from SWAMP and 5 water samples from USGS. Three of 9 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline (LeBlanc, et al. 2004; SWAMP, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

DFG Evaluation guideline of 0.10 ug/L (Siepmann & Finlayson, 2000; Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Five stations were sampled. All were situated along the New River from the international boundary with Mexico to the outlet (mouth) of New River in the Salton Sea. The boundary station had two exceedances and the outlet had one exceedance.

Temporal Representation:

Four samples were taken during the spring (May) and the fall (October) of 2002. Exceedances at both stations occurred in the fall sampling event. Five samples were collected in April 2003 and the diazinon concentration exceeded the evaluation guideline in one sample.

Environmental Conditions:

The New River flows from Mexico through the Imperial Valley in the Salton Sea. Most of the water flowing through it comes from agricultural return flows.

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5416, Diazinon	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4868

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighteen water quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 3 locations along the New River. Of these total samples , 2 exceeded the CDFG Hazardous Assessment Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 11/04/2003, and 10/04/2004, at two different locations, at the International Boundary location, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea location near Calipatria, CA (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Hazardous Assessment Criteria of 0.16 ug/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Eighteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, usually in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Three addtional samples were collected from these two locations, two in 4/2003, and one in 10/2004 The Even Hewes Highway overpass location was sampled once in 4/2003.The exceedences were found in samples collected from 11/04/2003 through 10/04/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 5416, Diazinon	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5186

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twelve water quality samples were taken at 4 locations along the river, generally collected from 9/13/2006 through 4/18/2007. Of these total samples , 4 exceeded the CDFG Hazardous Assessment Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 10/14/2006, 10/15/2006, 10/16/2006, and 10/19/2006 from all four locations (Orlando et al, 2008).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Hazardous Assessment Criteria of 0.16 ug/l (1 hr. ave.) for freshwater aquatic life use protection (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Twelve samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/13/2006 through 4/18/2007. Samples were collected from the outlet to the Salton Sea monthly from 9/2006 through 11/2006 and from 2/2007 through 4/2007. The three other locations were sampled only twice, once in 10/2006 and another time in 3/2007. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 10/14/2006 through 3/13/2007. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 10/14/2006 through 10/19/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan, Imperial Valley Pesticides TMDL Assessment Studies. Water Science Center. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	4431	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under sections 4.1, 4.5, and 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Dieldrin consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. Line of evidence No. 4870 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there were not enough samples. Most of the sample results in this line of evidence were non-detect, but the detection limit was above the criteria. According to Section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy, when the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis. Because of this only one sample result was acceptable. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 4870 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5202 in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of 168 water samples collected. When compared to the CTR 0.00014 ug/l threshold for human health there were 74 exceedances out of 74 acceptable water samples collected, twenty-one water sample results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment over the sampling years. When compared to the CTR 0.24 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances out of 91 total water samples taken, seventy-seven water sample results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment or the results were not analyzed using this criteria. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 0.46 ug/kg threshold for consumption, there were 34 exceedances out of 35 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, eleven water sample results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment. When compared to the NAS 100 ug/kg threshold for aquatic life there were no exceedances. There were a total of fourteen sediment samples collected. When compared to the sediment quality guideline of 61.8 ug/g, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 74 out of 74 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5202

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighty-one water samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Eight water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 73 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, 73 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 4/02/1992 at 2 locations (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.00014 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca, and USGS Station No.10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Eighty-one samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Four samples were collected in 1969, 76 samples were collected from 1970-1979, no samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1992. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 8/13/1969 through 4/02/1992.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4870

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen water samples were taken at two locations on the river. Thirteen water sample results could not be used because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptible water quality sample was collected on 5/06/2002 from the outlet to the Salton Sea location. This sample exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.00014 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River sampling locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October.The exceedence was found in a sample collected on 5/06/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2940

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. All samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.012 ppb. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater acute maximum = 0.24 ppb and freshwater chronic maximum = 0.056 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5261

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eighty-one samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Eight water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 73 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, none exceed the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) 0.24 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., and USGS Station No. 10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Eighty-one samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Four samples were collected in 1969, 76 samples were collected from 1970-1979, 0 samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1992.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5400

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Eight fish fillet samples and 3 whole fish samples could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentrations. The 33 fish fillet samples and 2 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 33 fish fillet samples and 2 whole fish samples collected at two locations exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. At the Westmorland location the exceedances were found in; 15 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 3/13/1979, (4)5/09/1980, 5/24/1981, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 10/10/1985, 9/03/1987, 8/15/1991, 10/27/1995, 11/20/1997 and 11/11/1998; 5 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 6/22/1978, 11/18/1988, 8/03/1990, 9/20/1992, and 9/29/1993; 5 carp fillet composite samples collected on 5/24/1981, 6/13/1983, 5/24/1984, 10/09/1985, and 10/15/1986; 2 carp single fish fillet samples collected on 6/22/1978, and 12/09/1999, and; 1spiny soft shelled turtle collected on 9/20/1992. At the International Boundary location exceedances were found in; 4 carp fillet composite samples collected on 7/31/1990, 12/18/1991, 6/16/1993, and 11/02/1994; 1 spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample collected on 5/12/1987; 1 sailfin molly whole fish composite sample collected on 10/01/1985, and; 1 tilapia single whole fish sample collected on 5/17/1984 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 0.46 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Forty-one fish fillet samples of channel catfish, carp, flathead catfish, tilapia, spiny soft shelled turtle, and yellow bullhead were collected. Fifteen channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979, (4)1980, 1981, (2)1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1991, 1995 and 1997-98. Five channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1988, 1990, 1992-93. Ten carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1981-86, 1990, 1991, 1993, and 1994. Five carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One flathead catfish single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-92. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1987. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Five whole fish samples of red swamp crayfish, tilapia and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-1980. One tilapia single whole fish sample was collected in the year 1984. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite sample was collected in the year 1985. The exceedances were found in samples collected from 6/22/1978 through 12/09/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4431, Dieldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5596

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. The fish fillet samples and whole fish samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, none exceeded the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4455	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Mercury
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under sections 4.1, 4.5, and 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Nine lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Mercury consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. Line of Evidence No. 5329 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only 1 sample result in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5329 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 in the Final Use Rating. The results of Line of Evidence No. 2926 are not included in the Final Use Rating because the data contained in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No. 5563. This prevents data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of one hundred and thirty-four water samples collected. When compared to the CTR 0.051 ug/l threshold for human health, there were 2 out of 16 acceptable water samples collected, one hundred and eighteen sample results were either unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and not used in the assessment or the sample results were not assessed using this criteria. When compared to the NRWQC 1.4 ug/l threshold for aquatic life there were 2 exceedances out of 131 acceptable water samples taken, three sample results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and not used in the assessment. There were a total of thirty-three fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 0.3 ug/kg threshold for consumption, there were 6 exceedances out of 22 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in eleven fish tissue samples Mercury was not analyzed. There were a total of fifteen sediment samples collected. When compared to sediment quality guideline 1.06 mg/kg threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 6 of 22 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2926

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two out of 12 samples exceeded. A total of 7 filet composite and individual samples of channel catfish, 4 composite and individual samples of carp, and one composite of tilapia were collected. Channel catfish were collected in 1992-93, 1995, 1997-98, and 2001-02. Carp were collected in 1993-94 and 1997. Tilapia were collected in 1996. Two composite samples of carp in 1993-94 exceeded the guideline (TSMP, 2002).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River Basin RWQCB Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be presenting concentration that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

OEHHA Screening Value 0.3 ug/g.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

The New River from the International Boundary to the USGS Station in Calexico only. Two stations on the New River were samples: at the gauging station about one mile downstream of the Lack Road Bridge near Westmorland and near the international boundary.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during the period of 1992-1998 and 2001-02.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2925

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected monthly by the RWQCB from June 1995 to December 2003. Of the 98 monthly samples, 2 were in exceedance of the chronic criteria and 1 was in exceedance of the acute criteria. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB at 3 locations from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. None of these 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999. One of these 9 samples was in exceedance of the acute criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater chronic maximum = 0.77 ppb as a 4-day average and freshwater acute maximum = 1.4 ppb.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The New River from the International Boundary to the USGS Station in Calexico only. The 98 and 9 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. The 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary at the International Drain, and at the Puente Madero.

Temporal Representation:

The 98 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 through December 2003. The 6 samples were collected on 6 days from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. The 9 samples were collected monthly from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5204

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven water samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Five water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 2 acceptable water quality samples were collected on 5/30/1979 and 7/24/1980 from near Westmorland, CA. Both samples exceeded the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.051 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Seven samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/1978 through 7/1980. One sample was collected in 1978, 2 samples were collected in 1979, and 4 samples were collected in 1980. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/30/1979 and 7/24/1980.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5563

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-nine fish fillet samples and 4 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Seven fish fillet and 4 whole fish sample results could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the samples. The 22 fish fillet samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 11/1998 at two locations. Of these total samples, 6 fish fillet samples collected at one location exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value. At the International Boundary location exceedances were found in; 4 carp fillet composite samples collected on 7/31/1990, 12/18/1991, 6/16/1993, and 11/02/1994; 1 carp single fish fillet sample collected on 7/20/1989, and; 1 yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample collected on 7/20/1989 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 0.3 mg/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Twenty nine fish fillet samples of carp, tilapia, grass carp, spiny soft shelled turtle, channel catfish, and yellow bullhead were collected. Six carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1982, 1986, 1990-91, and 1993-94. Four carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. One grass carp fillet composite sample was collected the year 1987. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-1992. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet samples was collected in the year 1987. Nine channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979-80, (2)1982, 1987, 1991, 1995, and 1997-98. Four channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1990, and 1992-93. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Four whole fish composite samples of red swamp crayfish, and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-80. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite samples was collected in the year 1985. Exceedances were found in samples collected from 7/20/1989 through 11/02/1994.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5242

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Three water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 4 acceptable water quality samples were collected from 9/1978 through 7/1980. Of these total samples, none exceeded the NRWQC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (NRWQC) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1.4 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2002).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Seven samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/1978 through 7/1980. One was collected in 1978, 2 samples were collected in 1979, and 4 samples were collected in 1980.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

26683

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (NRWQC) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1.4 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2002).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l anthracene, 0.046 ug/l beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 0.051 ug/l Mercury, 4600 ug/l Nickel, and 11000 ug/l Pyrene (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4455, Mercury	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5329

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 1.06 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4471	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Organic Enrichment/Low Dissolved Oxygen
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2010
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Dissolved Oxygen consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. Line of Evidence No. 2932 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. The results of this line of evidence will not be used in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of two hundred and twenty-eight water samples collected. When compared to the Basin Plan 5 mg/l threshold for WARM beneficial use, there were 137 exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 137 out of 228 total measurements exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4471, Organic Enrichment/Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2932

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB during July of 1999. There were a total of 3264 measurements over 16 days. The objective was exceeded numerous times on 14 of those collection days (SWRCB, 2003).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: The dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as warm freshwater habitat shall not be reduced below 5 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at Mexicali.

Temporal Representation:

Measurements were taken every few minutes each day from 7/7/99 through 7/23/99. No measurements were taken on 7/20/99.

Environmental Conditions:

Other information collected includes water temperature, conductivity, and pH.

QAPP Information:

QA/QC used by RWQCB staff.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4471, Organic Enrichment/Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5239

Pollutant:

Low Dissolved Oxygen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

112

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One hundred and twelve water quality measurements were taken at 3 locations in the river, collected between 3/1973 and 2/1985. Out of these total measurements, 46 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedences were found in measurements collected from 6/26/1973 through 9/19/1984 from 2 locations, near the International Boundary in Calexico, CA, and near Westmorland, CA (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below the following minimum levels at any time: Water designated WARM 5 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Measurements were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., USGS Station No. 10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca, and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One hundred and twelve measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 3/1973 through 2/1985. Fifty-four measurements were collected from 1973-1979, and 58 samples were collected from 1980-1985. The exceedences were found in measurements collected from 6/26/1973 through 9/19/1984.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4471, Organic Enrichment/Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2931

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

116

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected on 83 different days from January 1997 through March 2004. Measurements were taken monthly. There were 83 exceedances of these 83 measurements. Samples were collected from January to December of 1999. Eighteen days of samples were collected and of the 18 samples there were 5 exceedances. D.O. levels dropped below 5 mg/L (3.54-4.95 mg/L) in 5 samples collected in June, July, August, and September. Samples were also collected by IID in 1997 and 1998. There were 3 exceedances of these 15 measurements (SWRQCB, 2003).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: The dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as warm freshwater habitat shall not be reduced below 5 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The 83 samples were collected from the New River at the International Boundary. Specific sample collection locations are unknown for the 18 and 15 sample sizes.

Temporal Representation:

The 83 samples collected each month from January 1997 to March 2004. There are no data for October, November, and December of 1999. The 18 samples were collected from 1/21/1999 through 12/14/1999. Samples were collected once a month, except during April through September when there were two samples collected each month. The 15 samples were collected monthly from 1/28/1997 through 3/17/1998.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 83 samples, other field measurements include flow, temperature, pH, and conductivity. Field observations were also recorded. For the 18 samples, all measurements were taken at a depth of 0.5 meters. Samples were taken twice a month during the warmer months of April through September.

QAPP Information:

Data used in 2002 assessment. Also used IID SOPs.QA/QC used by RWQCB staff.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4387	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1, 4.5, and 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. The results Line of Evidence No. 2934 will not be used in the Final Use Rating because the data in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No. 5423, using an outdate standard. This is done to prevent data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of one hundred and seven water samples collected. When compared to the CTR 2.0 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 3.6 ug/kg threshold for consumption there were 22 exceedances out of 22 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, twenty-four fish tissue samples results were either unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and not used in the assessment or PCBs were not analyzed in the sample. When compared to the NAS 500 ug/kg threshold for aquatic life, there were 2 exceedances out of 43 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, three fish tissue samples results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and not used in the assessment. There were a total of fourteen sediment samples collected. When compared to the sediment quality guideline 676 ug/kg threshold, there were no exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 22 of 22 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4387, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5641

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 500 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4387, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5423

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Twenty fish fillet samples and 4 whole fish samples could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and it could not be determined that the detection limit was not below the criteria concentration or the constituent was not analyzed in the sample. The 21 fish fillet samples and 1 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 5/1980 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 21 fish fillet samples and 1 whole fish samples collected at two locations exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. At the Westmorland location exceedances were found in; 8 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 5/09/1980, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 9/03/1987, 8/15/1991, 11/20/1997 and 11/11/1998; 3 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 8/03/1990, 9/20/1992, and 9/29/1993; 4 carp fillet composite samples collected on 6/13/1983, 5/24/1984, 10/09/1985, and 10/15/1986, and; 1 carp single fish fillet sample was collected on 12/09/1999. At the International Boundary location exceedances were found in; 4 carp fillet composite samples collected on 7/31/1990, 12/18/1991, 6/16/1993, and 11/02/1994; 1 carp single sample fish fillet sample collected on 12/10/1997, and; 1 tilapia single whole fish sample collected on 5/17/1984 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 3.6 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Forty-one fish fillet samples of channel catfish, carp, flathead catfish, tilapia, spiny soft shelled turtle, and yellow bullhead were collected. Fifteen channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979, (4)1980, 1981, (2)1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1991, 1995 and 1997-98. Five channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1988, 1990, 1992-93. Ten carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1981-86, 1990, 1991, 1993, and 1994. Five carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One flathead catfish single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-92. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1987. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Five whole fish samples of red swamp crayfish, tilapia and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-1980. One tilapia single whole fish sample was collected in the year 1984. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite sample was collected in the year 1985. The exceedances were found in samples collected from 5/09/1980 through 12/09/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4387, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4387, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2934

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten out of 13 samples exceeded. A total of 7 filet composite and individual samples of channel catfish, 5 filet composite and individual samples of carp, and one filet composite of tilapia were collected. Channel catfish were collected in 1992-93, 1995, 1997-98, and 2001-02. Carp were collected in 1993-94, 1997, and 1999. Tilapia were collected in 1996. A 1994 carp sample, a 1995 channel catfish sample, and the 1996 tilapia sample had no detectable levels of PCB (TSMP, 2002).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River Basin RWQCB Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

OEHHA Screening Value 20 ng/g.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Two stations on the New River were sampled: at the gauging station about one mile downstream of the Lack Road Bridge near Westmorland and near the international boundary.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during the period of 1992-1999 and 2001-02.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4387, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2933

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

107

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB on 6/21/2001 at 9 different stations on the New River. All 9 samples were non-detects. There were no exceedances. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 to December 2003. None of these 98 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater acute total PCBs maximum = 2 ppb and freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average based on hardness.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary.

Temporal Representation:

The 9 samples were collected on 6/21/2001 and the 98 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 to December 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by North Coast Labs.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4456	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Selenium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Selenium consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. There were 16 water samples that exceeded the water quality objectives in two different dat sets. In one data set when comparing analysis results to the CTR 5 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were 14 exceedances out of 117 total water samples taken over the sampling years. In another data set when comparing the analysis results to the Basin Plan 20 ug/l threshold for downstream COMM beneficial use, there were 2 exceedances out of 15 total water samples taken. There were a total of thirty-three fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 7400 ug/kg threshold for consumption there were no exceedances out of 24 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in nine fish tissue samples Selenium was not analyzed. There were a total of fourteen sediment samples collected. However, no evaluation guideline for the fraction of selenium associated with sediment could be found that protects human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters and meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because of this, Line of Evidence No. 30044 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 2 of 15 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4456, Selenium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5426

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-nine fish fillet samples and 4 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Six fish fillet and 3 whole fish sample results could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the samples. The 23 fish fillet and 1 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 10/1985 through 12/1999 at two locations. Of these total samples, none exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 7400 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4456, Selenium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30044

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of Selenium for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at the International Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. The other two sampling locations were sampled twice in May and October of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4456, Selenium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4873

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples , 2 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/09/2005, and 5/10/2005, from the two locations (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: For all surface waters that are tributaries to the Salton Sea, a one hour average value of selenium shall not exceed .02 mg/L (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fifteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October. An additional sample was collected from the International Boundary site in July 2003. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 5/09/2005 through 5/10/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4456, Selenium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2927

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

117

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 through December 2003. Of the 98 monthly samples, 8 were in exceedance of the chronic criteria and 2 were in exceedance of the USEPA: freshwater acute maximum. Four samples were also collected during the spring and fall of 2002 and numerical data was generated from them. All four samples exceeded the CTR: 5 μg/L criterion. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB at three locations from 6/11/96 through 12/4/96. None of these 6 samples were in exceedance of the USEPA: freshwater acute maximum. Samples were collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/99 through 11/6/99. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance of the USEPA: freshwater acute maximum (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater chronic maximum = 5 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. The 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, a the International Drain, and at Puente Madero. The 4 samples were samples at 2 stations, one at the International Boundary with Mexico and the other at the outlet (mouth) of the New River into the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

The 98 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 through December 2003. The 6 samples were collected on 6 days from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996, the 9 samples were collected monthly from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999, and the 4 samples were collected during the spring and fall of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided. And the SWAMP QAPP was also used.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4335	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Toxaphene
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess toxaphene consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. The results of Line of Evidence No. 2948 are not included in the Final Use Rating because the data contained in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No. 5424. This prevents data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. There were a total of four water samples collected. When compared to the CTR 0.73 ug/l threshold for aquatic life, there were no exceedances. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 6.1 ug/kg threshold for consumption there were 20 exceedances out of 20 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, twenty six fish tissue sample results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment. When compared to the NAS 100 ug/kg threshold there were 19 exceedances out of 43 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, three fish tissue sample results were unacceptable to Listing Policy guidelines and were not used in the assessment. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 20 of 20 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4335, Toxaphene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2947

Pollutant:

Toxaphene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at 4 locations on the New River. All samples were below the detection limit (0.760 ppb), which is greater than the acute and chronic criteria. Therefore, the data cannot be assessed in comparison to the chronic criteria (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater acute maximum = 0.73 ppb and chronic maximum = 0.0002 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4335, Toxaphene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2948

Pollutant:

Toxaphene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven out of 13 samples exceeded. A total of 7 filet composite and individual samples of channel catfish, 5 composite and individual samples of carp, and one composite of tilapia were collected. Channel catfish were collected in 1992-93, 1995, 1997-98, and 2001-02. Carp were collected in 1993-94, 1997, and 1999. Tilapia were collected in 1996. Channel catfish samples exceeded the guideline in 1993, 1995, 1997-98 2001-02. Carp exceeded in 1999. Only the New River at Westmoreland station met the criteria in the Listing Policy (TSMP, 2002).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River Basin RWQCB Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be presenting concentration that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

OEHHA Screening Value 30 ng/g.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Two stations on the New River were sampled: at the gauging station about one mile downstream of the Lack Road Bridge near Westmorland and near the international boundary. Only the New River at Westmoreland station should be placed on the list.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during the period of 1992-1999 and 2001-02.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4335, Toxaphene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5652

Pollutant:

Toxaphene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. One fish fillet samples and 2 whole fish samples could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentrations. The 40 fish fillet samples and 3 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 3/1979 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 19 fish fillet samples collected at one location exceeded the NAS tissue guideline. At the Westmorland location exceedances were found in; 13 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 3/13/1979, (4)5/09/1980, 5/24/1981, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 9/03/1987, 8/15/1991, 10/27/1995, and 11/20/1997; 4 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 6/22/1978, 11/18/1988, 8/03/1990, and 9/29/1993; 1 carp fillet composite samples collected on 5/24/1984, and; 1 carp single fish fillet sample collected on 12/09/1999 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4335, Toxaphene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5424

Pollutant:

Toxaphene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Twenty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentrations. The 20 fish fillet samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 3/1979 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 20 fish fillet samples collected at one location exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. At the Westmorland location exceedances were found in; 14 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 3/13/1979, (4)5/09/1980, 5/24/1981, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 9/03/1987, 8/15/1991, 10/27/1995, 11/20/1997 and 11/11/1998; 4 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 6/22/1978, 11/18/1988, 8/03/1990, and 9/29/1993; 1 carp fillet composite samples collected on 5/24/1984, and; 1 carp single fish fillet sample collected on 12/09/1999 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 6.1 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Forty-one fish fillet samples of channel catfish, carp, flathead catfish, tilapia, spiny soft shelled turtle, and yellow bullhead were collected. Fifteen channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979, (4)1980, 1981, (2)1982, 1983, 1985, 1987, 1991, 1995 and 1997-98. Five channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1988, 1990, 1992-93. Ten carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1981-86, 1990, 1991, 1993, and 1994. Five carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One flathead catfish single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-92. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1987. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Five whole fish samples of red swamp crayfish, tilapia and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-1980. One tilapia single whole fish sample was collected in the year 1984. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite sample was collected in the year 1985. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 3/13/1979 through 12/09/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	5383	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Toxicity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The results of Line of Evidence No. 2951 are not included in the Final Use Rating because the data contained in the line of evidence is identical to or overlaps with data in Line of Evidence No. 23491. This prevents data from being counted twice in the Final Use Rating. Based on section 4.6 the site has significant sediment and water toxicity. Eight water samples exceed the water quality objective. When compared to control samples, eight out of 10 total water samples taken over all the sampling years exhibited toxicity. Four sediment samples exceed the water quality objectives. When compared to control samples, four out of 4 total water samples exceed the water quality objective. While many pollutants are found in this water body it is uncertain which cause these effects. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. Eight of 10 water samples and four of 4 sediment samples exhibit toxicity when compared to control samples. These exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 5383, Toxicity	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

23491

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water samples were generally collected from 5/2002 through 5/2005 from two locations on the River. Of these total samples, 8 water samples from two locations produced significant toxicity when indicator organisms (hyalella azteca) were exposed to the sampled water. The samples exhibiting toxicity were collected from the International Boundary location on 5/08/2002, 10/01/2002, 4/09/2003, 5/03/2004, 10/04/2004, and 5/09/2005; collected from near the Salton Sea outlet on 10/05/2004, and 5/10/2005 (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan:All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or indigenous aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Water Toxicity was evaluated according to SWAMP methodology using the Hyalella Azteca 10 day water toxicity test outlined in the USEPA " Methods for measuring the acute toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater and marine organisms (2002)." This method was used to test the toxic effects of water samples on the freshwater test organism hyalella azteca. Waters are considered toxic when test samples show significant toxic levels when compared to a negative control. Significant toxicity is determined when statistical tests result in an alpha of less than 5%, and percent control less than the evaluation threshold (Puckett, 2002).

Guideline Reference:

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)

Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 2002 to 2005, in May and October. A water sample was not collected from near the Salton Sea outlet in May 2003 or May 2004. Water samples were not collected from either location in October 2003. The samples exhibiting toxicity were from 5/10/2002 through 5/11/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002). In depth descriptions about the sampling and analysis for toxicity can be found in Werner et al, 2006.

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)

Toxicity Testing and Toxicity Identification Examination. U.C. Davis.- Aquatic Toxicity Laboratory. Davis, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5383, Toxicity	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2952

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Toxicity testing data generated from 4 sediment samples. Four of these samples were toxic (SWAMP, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or indigenous aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Significant toxicity as compared to control.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Three stations were sampled, all were situated along the New River from the international boundary with Mexico to the outlet (mouth) of New River into the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

All samples were taken between the spring (May) and the fall (October) of 2002. Toxicity was detected during both seasons.

Environmental Conditions:

The New River flows from Mexico through the Imperial Valley in the Salton Sea. Most of the water flowing through it comes from agricultural return flows.

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5383, Toxicity	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2951

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Toxicity testing data generated from 3 water samples. Three of these samples were toxic (SWAMP, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or indigenous aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Significant toxicity as compared to control.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Three stations were sampled, all were situated along the New River from the international boundary with Mexico to the outlet (mouth) of New River into the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

All samples were taken between the spring (May) and the fall (October) of 2002. Toxicity was detected during both seasons.

Environmental Conditions:

The New River flows from Mexico through the Imperial Valley in the Salton Sea. Most of the water flowing through it comes from agricultural return flows.

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4086	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Pathogens
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Confined Animal Feeding Operations (NPS) \| Municipal Point Sources \| Out-of-state source \| Point Source \| Wastewater
TMDL Name:	New River Pathogen
TMDL Project Code:	152
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA:	08/14/2002
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 and 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 2950 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. In the "Water Quality Objectives" Chapter of the Basin Plan under "Bacteria" there are objectives for Enterococcus, E.coli, and fecal coliform. These three organisms are pathogen indicators in water. There were a total of ten water samples collected. When compared to the Basin Plan 100 MPN/100 ml Enterococcus threshold for RECI beneficial use, there were 10 exceedances. When compared to the Basin Plan 500 MPN/100ml Enterococcus threshold for RECII beneficial use, there were 10 exceedances. There were a total of eleven water samples collected. When compared to the Basin Plan 400 MPN/100ml E.coli threshold for RECI beneficial use, there were 11 exceedances. When compared to the Basin Plan 2000 MPN/100ml E. coli threshold for RECII beneficial use, there were 11 exceedances. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list and placing it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 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 Listing Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Listing Policy. 3. At a minimum, 10 out of 10 water samples taken exceeded the Basin Plan Enterococcus Water Quality Objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. The New River Pathogen TMDL was approved by the RWQCB in 2001 and approved by USEPA on 08/14/2002. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information for this recommendation, RWQCB 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 implementation plan has been approved.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4086, Pathogens	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4909

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 4/2003, at 4 locations in the New River. Of these total samples, 10 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/06/2002, 5/07/2002, 5/08/2002, 9/30/2002, 10/01/2002, 10/02/2002, and 4/09/2003 from all four locations (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan:In waters designated for noncontact water recreation (REC II) the maximum allowable Enterococcus density is 500 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Ten water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed in May and October 2002, and April 2003, at the International Boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. The other two locations were samples in May and October of 2002. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 5/08/2002 through 5/09/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4086, Pathogens	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4902

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eleven water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 4/2003 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, 11 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/06/2002, 5/07/2002, 5/08/2002, 9/30/2002, 10/01/2002, 10/02/2002 and 4/09/2003 from all four locations (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan:In waters designated for noncontact water recreation (REC II) the maximum allowable E. coli density is 2000 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Eleven water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed in May and October 2002, and April 2003. Samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 5/06/2002 through 5/24/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4086, Pathogens	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4894

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eleven water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 4/2005 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples , 11 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/06/2002, 5/08/2002, 9/30/2002, 10/01/2002, 4/09/2003, and 5/24/2004 from all four different locations (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan:In waters designated for water contact recreation (REC I) the maximum allowable E. coli density is 400 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Eleven water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, usually in May and October, from 5/2002 through 4/2003 at the International Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea locations. An additional sample was collected from the International Boundary in 5/2004. The rest of the locations were sampled in May and October of 2002. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 5/06/2002 through 5/24/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4086, Pathogens	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2950

Pollutant:

Pathogens

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 2006 303(d)

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4086, Pathogens	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4900

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 4/2003 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples , 10 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 5/06/2002, 5/07/2002, 5/08/2002, 9/30/2002, 10/01/2002, 10/02/2002, and 4/09/2003 from all four locations (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan:In waters designated for water contact recreation (REC I) the maximum allowable Enterococcus density is 100 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Ten water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed in May and October 2002, and April 2003 from all locations. Samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 5/06/2002 through 4/09/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4372	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Sediment
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
TMDL Name:	New River Sedimentation/Siltation
TMDL Project Code:	153
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA:	03/31/2003
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 2949 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is instead used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. A New River Sediment TMDL was approved by the RWQCB in 2002 and subsequently approved by USEPA in 2003. The TMDL set a numeric target of 200 mg/l annual average Total Suspended Solids (TSS) concentration. Implementation of the TMDL is expected to result in attainment of the standard. There were a total of 178 water samples collected representing 7 years of data. When comparing the samples results to the TMDL 200 mg/l annual average TSS numeric target for aquatic life uses, there were no years in which the annual average TSS exceeded the numeric target. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is 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. 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. A Sediment TMDL was develped and approved by the RWQCB in 2002 and subsequently approved by USEPA in 2003. Implementation of the TMDL is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 4. At a minimum, None of 7 TSS annual averages exceeded the New River Sediment TMDL Numeric Target and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. However there are not enough annual averages to support delisting according to instructions given for Table 4.2. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information for this recommendation, RB 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 implementation plan has been approved.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4372, Sediment	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

24794

Pollutant:

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eleven water samples were collected from two locations along the river over a 3 year period. Over these three years, none of the annual average TSS concentrations exceeded the TMDL Numeric Target (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The Final Numeric Target for the New River Sedimentation Siltation TMDL for TSS is an annual average of 200 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Eleven water samples were generally collected from 4/2003 through 5/2005. Water samples were collected and analyzed in April and October of 2003, May and November of 2004, and May of 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4372, Sediment	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

24795

Pollutant:

Total Suspended Solids (TSS)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One hundred and sixty-seven water samples were collected from 4 locations along the river over a 4 year period. Over these 4 years, none of the annual average TSS concentrations exceeded the TMDL Numeric Target (CRBRWQCB, 2007).

Data Reference:

Imperial Valley Sedimentation/Siltation TMDL Implementation Update, Staff Report to Regional Board, June 26, 2007. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The Final Numeric Target for the New River Sedimentation Siltation TMDL for TSS is an annual average of 200 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, Even Hewes Highway near Seeley, CA, Drop 2, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

One hundred and sixty-seven water samples were generally from 3/2003 through 12/2006. Samples were collected and analyzed monthly from 3/2003 through 12/2006. Samples were not collected from each site every month.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality control for the sampling and analysis was conducted in accordance with an approved QAPP (CRBRWQCB, 2003b).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for New River Siltation/Sedimentation TMDL Implementation. Palm Desert, CA: Colorado River Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4372, Sediment	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2949

Pollutant:

Sediment

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 2006 303(d)

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):


DECISION ID	17644	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane \| 1,1-Dichloropropene \| 1,2,3-Trichloropropane \| 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) \| 1,3-Dichloropropane \| 2,2-Dichloropropane \| Bromochloromethane \| Chloroform \| Ethylene dibromide \| Methylene bromide (Dibromomethane)
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

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 Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, and 1,1-Dichloropropene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, or 1,1-Dichloropropene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, or 1,1-Dichloropropene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17644, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29838

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chloroform, Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, or 1,1-Dichloropropene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	7952	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 7952, 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5037

Pollutant:

1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 11 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Ninteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the international Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Another sample was collected from the International Boundary location in 7/2003. The rest of the locations were sampled twice in May and October of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8266	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8266, 1,1,2-Trichloroethane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8248	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinylidene Chloride
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 16 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8248, 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinylidene Chloride	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5041

Pollutant:

1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinylidene Chloride | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sixteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 71 ug/l Benzene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, and 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Nineteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Another sample was collected from the International Boundary location in 7/2003. The rest of the locations were sampled twice in May and October of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17358	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene \| Chloroethane \| Dichlorodifluoromethane \| Methyl chloride (Chloromethane) \| cis-1,3-Dichloropropene \| trans-1,3-Dichloropropene
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

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 Methyl Chloride, Chloroethane, Dichlorodifluoromethane, cis-1,3-Dichloropropene, trans-1,3-Dichloropropene, and 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Methyl Chloride, Chloroethane, Dichlorodifluoromethane, cis-1,3-Dichloropropene, trans-1,3-Dichloropropene, or 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Methyl Chloride, Chloroethane, Dichlorodifluoromethane, cis-1,3-Dichloropropene, trans-1,3-Dichloropropene, or 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17358, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29864

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Five water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 7/2003 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Methyl Chloride, Chloroethane Dichlorodifluoromethane, cis-1,3-Dichloropropene, trans-1,3-Dichloropropene, or 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Five water samples were collected. Water samples were collected from all four sampling locations in 5/2002. In 7/2003 a sample was collected from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17339	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene \| 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene \| Bromobenzene \| Cumene \| n-Butylbenzene \| n-Propylbenzene \| sec-Butylbenzene \| tert-Butylbenzene
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

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 Chloroform, Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, and 1,1-Dichloropropene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chloroform, Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, or 1,1-Dichloropropene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chloroform, Methylene Bromide, Bromochloromethane, Ethylene Dibromide, 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,2,3,-Trichloropropane, 1,2-Dibromo 3-Chloropropane, 1,3-Dichloropropane, 2,2-Dichloropropane, 1,1-Dichloropropenefor the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17339, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29836

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8261	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,2-Dichloroethane
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8261, 1,2-Dichloroethane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8262	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1,2-Dichloropropane
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8262, 1,2-Dichloropropane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17343	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1-Methylnaphthalene \| 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene \| 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene \| 2-Methylnaphthalene \| Acenaphthylene \| Naphthalene
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Napthalene, Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methynaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, and 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 an d 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Naphthalene, Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methynaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, or 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene or the sediment fractions of Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methynaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, or 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Naphthalene, Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methynaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, or 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene or the sediment fractions of Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methynaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, or 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17343, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30028

Pollutant:

1-Methylnaphthalene | 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene | 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene | 2-Methylnaphthalene | Acenaphthylene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, or 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17343, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29842

Pollutant:

1-Methylnaphthalene | 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene | 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene | 2-Methylnaphthalene | Acenaphthylene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of Acenaphthylene, 1-Methylnaphthalene, 2-Methynaphthalene, 2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene, or 2,3,5-Trimethylnaphthalene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at the International boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17343, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29844

Pollutant:

Naphthalene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of Naphthalene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Thirteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at the International boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October. An extra sample was collected from the International Boundary location in July of 2003. At Even Hewes and Drop 2 samples were collected in May of 2002 only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17342	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	1-Methylphenanthrene \| Phenanthrene
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Phenanthrene, and 1-Methylphenanthrene consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Phenanthrene, or 1-Methylphenanthrene or the sediment fraction of 1-Methylphenanthrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Phenanthrene, or 1-Methylphenanthrene or the sediment fraction of 1-Methylphenanthrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17342, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30027

Pollutant:

1-Methylphenanthrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of 1-Methylphenanthrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17342, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29841

Pollutant:

1-Methylphenanthrene | Phenanthrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of Phenanthrene, or 1-Methylphenanthrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17642	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	2-Chlorotoluene \| 4-Chlorotoluene \| p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)
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

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 2-Chlorotoluene, and 4-Chlorotoluene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Chlorotoluene, or 4-Chlorotoluene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Chlorotoluene, or 4-Chlorotoluene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17642, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29837

Pollutant:

2-Chlorotoluene | 4-Chlorotoluene | p-Cymene (p-Isopropyltoluene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Chlorotoluene, 4-Chlorotoluene, or p-Cymene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17360	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	2-Hexanone \| Hydroxide \| Pheophytin a
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.7.1 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess 2-Hexanone, Hydroxide, and Pheophytin a consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.7.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Hexanone, Hydroxide, or Pheophytin a for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Hexanone, Hydroxide, or Pheophytin a for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17360, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29866

Pollutant:

2-Hexanone | Hydroxide | Pheophytin a

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed in 5/2002 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of 2-Hexanone, Hydroxide, or Pheophytin a for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Four water samples were collected. Water samples were collected from all four sampling locations in 5/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8227	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Acenaphthene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8227, Acenaphthene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17369	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Acenaphthene \| Dichlorobenzophenone \| Indeno[1,2,3-cd]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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Acenaphthene, pp-DCBP, and Indeno(1,2,3,c,d)Pyrene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Acenaphthene, pp-DCBP, or Indeno(1,2,3,c,d)Pyrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Acenaphthene, pp-DCBP, or Indeno(1,2,3,c,d)Pyrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17369, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30048

Pollutant:

Acenaphthene | Dichlorobenzophenone | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations in the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Acenaphthene, pp-DCBP, or Indeno(1,2,3,c,d)Pyrene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17359	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Acetone \| Methyl ethyl ketone (2-Butanone) \| Methyl isobutyl ketone (Methyl-2-Pentanone)
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

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 Acetone, Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, and Methyl Ethyl Ketone consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Acetone, Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, or Methyl Ethyl Ketone for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Acetone, Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, or Methyl Ethyl Ketone for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17359, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29865

Pollutant:

Acetone | Methyl ethyl ketone (2-Butanone) | Methyl isobutyl ketone (Methyl-2-Pentanone)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Five water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 7/2003 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Acetone, Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, or Methyl Ethyl Ketone for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Five water samples were collected. Water samples were collected from all four sampling locations in 5/2002. In 7/2003 a sample was collected from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4348	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Aldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence Nos. 5192 and 4853 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Both 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 20 water samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 42 fish tissue samples exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Two of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organism from this water. These do exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, however, both come from datasets where insufficient information was provided to support a listing decision. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4348, Aldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5569

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4348, Aldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5192

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-seven water samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Fifty-six water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration, or in some cases the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 1 acceptable water quality sample was collected on 5/30/1979. This sample exceeded the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 0.00014 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

A sample was collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Fifty-seven samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Three samples were collected in 1969, 53 samples were collected from 1970-1979, no samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1999. The exceedence was from a sample collected on 5/30/1979.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4348, Aldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5251

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-seven samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Fifty-five water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 2 acceptable water quality samples were collected on 5/30/1979 and 4/02/1992. These samples did not exceed the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) 3 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4348, Aldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4348, Aldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4853

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen water samples were taken at two locations on the river. Thirteen water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water sample, collected near the outlet to the Salton Sea location on 5/06/2002, exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.00014 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples were usually collected in May and October. The exceedence was found in a sample collected on 5/06/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4348, Aldrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2937

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. Of the 4 samples, all samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.0096 ppb. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule: freshwater acute maximum = 3 ppb.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17368	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Aldrin \| Chlorpyrifos \| Diazinon \| Toxaphene
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Aldrin, Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, and Toxaphene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Aldrin, Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, or Toxaphene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Aldrin, Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, or Toxaphene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17368, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30047

Pollutant:

Aldrin | Chlorpyrifos | Diazinon | Toxaphene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations in the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Aldrin, Chlorpyrifos, Diazinon, or Toxaphene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17366	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Aluminum \| Manganese \| Silver
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Aluminum, Manganese, and Silver consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Aluminum, Manganese, or Silver for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Aluminum, Manganese, or Silver for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17366, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30043

Pollutant:

Aluminum | Manganese | Silver

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Aluminum, Manganese, or Silver for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17352	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Ametryn \| Prometryn \| Simetryn \| Terbutryn
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

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 Ametryn, Prometryn, Simetryn, and Terbutryn consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Ametryn, Prometryn, Simetryn, or Terbutryn for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Ametryn, Prometryn, Simetryn, or Terbutryn for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17352, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29857

Pollutant:

Ametryn | Prometryn | Simetryn | Terbutryn

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of Ametryn, Prometryn, Simetryn, or Terbutryn for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Eight water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at the International boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October. Samples were not collected from the two locations in November of 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8230	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Anthracene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8230, Anthracene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17362	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Anthracene \| Benzo[a]anthracene \| Dibenz[a,h]anthracene
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Anthracene, Benz(a)Anthracene, and Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Anthracene, Benz(a)Anthracene, or Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Anthracene, Benz(a)Anthracene, or Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17362, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30039

Pollutant:

Anthracene | Benzo[a]anthracene | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Anthracene, Benz(a)Anthracene, or Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4330	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Arsenic
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1, 3.5 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One fish tissue 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. None of the 80 water samples exceeded the California Department of Fish and Game criteria. None of 193 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. One of 12 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. None of 17 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2920

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

All samples were collected on the New River. Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 through December 2003. None of these 98 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB at 3 locations from 6/11/1996 through 12/4/1996. None of these 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 through 11/6/1999. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater acute maximum = 340 ppb, freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average = 150 ppb.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. The 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, at the International Drain, and at Puente Madero.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5425

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-nine fish fillet samples and 4 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Twenty fish fillet and 1 whole fish sample results could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the samples. The 9 fish fillet and 3 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 11/1998 at two locations. Of these total samples, one whole fish sample collected at one location exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value. At the Westmorland location an exceedence was found in 1 red swamp crayfish whole fish composite sample collected on 5/09/1990 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 1 mg/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fish tissue samples were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Fish tissue samples were not collected from each location every sampling round. Twenty nine fish fillet samples of carp, tilapia, grass carp, spiny soft shelled turtle, channel catfish, and yellow bullhead were collected. Six carp fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1982, 1986, 1990-91, and 1993-94. Four carp single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1989, 1994, 1997, and 1999. One tilapia fillet composite sample was collected in the year 1996. One grass carp fillet composite sample was collected the year 1987. Two spiny soft shelled turtle fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1991-1992. One spiny soft shelled turtle single fish fillet samples was collected in the year 1987. Nine channel catfish fillet composite samples were collected in the years 1979-80, (2)1982, 1987, 1991, 1995, and 1997-98. Four channel catfish single fish fillet samples were collected in the years 1978, 1990, and 1992-93. One yellow bullhead single fish fillet sample was collected in the year 1989. Four whole fish composite samples of red swamp crayfish, and sailfin molly & mosquitofish were collected. Three red swamp crayfish whole fish composite samples were collected in the years 1978-80. One sailfin molly & mosquitofish whole fish composite samples was collected in the year 1985. An exceedance was found in a sample collected on 5/08/1980.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5026

Pollutant:

Arsenic | Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifteen water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 340 ug/l Arsenic, and 1724 ug/l Chromium (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fifteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Another sample was collected from the International Boundary location in 7/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5047

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Effects Criteria of 0.25 mg/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (USDOI, 1998).

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5254

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sixty-nine samples were taken at 3 locations on the river. Four water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 65 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 8/1998. Of these total samples, none exceed the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) 340 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Sixty-nine samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 8/1989. Twenty-nine samples were collected from 1973-1979, and 40 samples were collected from 1980-1989.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5277

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 3 locations on the river. Four water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 65 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 8/1998. Of these total samples, none exceed the USFWS Biological Effects Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Effects Criteria of 0.25 mg/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (USDOI, 1998).

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Sixty-nine samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 8/1989. Twenty-nine samples were collected from 1970-1979, and 40 samples were collected from 1980-1989.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4330, Arsenic	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5319

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 33 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., USGS Station No. 330559115385601 at Lack Road near Calipatria, Ca, and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. One sample was collected on 11/07/1973, another sample was collected on 10/24/01, and another sample was collected 4/14/03.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17353	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Atroton \| Prometon (Prometone) \| Secbumeton
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

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 Atroton, Prometon, and Secbumeton consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Atroton, Prometon, or Secbumeton for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Atroton, Prometon, or Secbumeton for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17353, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29858

Pollutant:

Atroton | Prometon (Prometone) | Secbumeton

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of Atroton, Prometon, or Secbumeton for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17346	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Azinphos, Ethyl (Ethyl Guthion) \| Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)
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

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 Azinphos, methyl, and Azinphos, ethyl consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Azinphos, methyl, or Azinphos, ethyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Azinphos, methyl, or Azinphos, ethyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17346, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29851

Pollutant:

Azinphos, Ethyl (Ethyl Guthion) | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Azinphos, methyl, or Azinphos, ethyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8246	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 16 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8246, Benzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5041

Pollutant:

1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinylidene Chloride | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8238	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 5325 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5325 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 4913 in the Final Use Rating. 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 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 15 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8238, Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4913

Pollutant:

Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) of 1450 ug/kg for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects (Macdonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8238, Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5325

Pollutant:

Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 1,450 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8238, Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twelve water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, and 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17351	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzo(e)Pyrene (4,5-benzopyrene) \| Benzo[g,h,i]perylene \| Biphenyl \| Terbufos
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, Biphenyl, and Terbufos consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, Biphenyl, or Terbufos or the sediment fractions of Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, or Biphenyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, Biphenyl, or Terbufos or the sediment fractions of Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, or Biphenyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17351, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29856

Pollutant:

Benzo(e)Pyrene (4,5-benzopyrene) | Benzo[g,h,i]perylene | Biphenyl | Terbufos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, Biphenyl, or Terbufos for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17351, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30034

Pollutant:

Benzo(e)Pyrene (4,5-benzopyrene) | Benzo[g,h,i]perylene | Biphenyl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Benzo(g,h,i)Perylene, Benzo(e)Pyrene, or Biphenyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8239	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzo[a]anthracene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 14 sediment samples exceeded the sediment qualty guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8239, Benzo[a]anthracene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8239, Benzo[a]anthracene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8254	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzo[b]fluoranthene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8254, Benzo[b]fluoranthene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17363	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzo[b]fluoranthene \| Benzo[k]fluoranthene
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Benzo(b)Fluoranthene, and Benzo(k)Fluoranthene consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Benzo(b)Fluoranthene, or Benzo(k)Fluoranthene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Benzo(b)Fluoranthene, Benzo(k)Fluoranthene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17363, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30040

Pollutant:

Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Benzo(b)Fluoranthene, or Benzo(k)Fluoranthene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8255	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Benzo[k]fluoranthene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8255, Benzo[k]fluoranthene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17349	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Bolstar \| Chlordane \| Ciodrin \| Dacthal \| Demeton s \| Dichlorvos \| Dimethoate \| Disulfoton \| Endrin Ketone \| Ethoprop \| Famphur \| Mirex \| Naled \| Oxadiazon
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Chlordane, Bolstar, Ciodrin, Dacthal, Demeton s, Dichlorvos, Dimethoate, Disulfoton, Endrin Ketone, Ethoprop, Famphur, Mirex, Naled, and Oxodiazon consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chlordane, Bolstar, Ciodrin, Dacthal, Demeton s, Dichlorvos, Dimethoate, Disulfoton, Endrin Ketone, Ethoprop, Famphur, Mirex, Naled, or Oxodiazon or the sediment fractions of Dacthal, Mirex, or Oxodiazon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chlordane, Bolstar, Ciodrin, Dacthal, Demeton s, Dichlorvos, Dimethoate, Disulfoton, Endrin Ketone, Ethoprop, Famphur, Mirex, Naled, or Oxodiazon or the sediment fractions of Dacthal, Mirex, or Oxodiazon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17349, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29854

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chlordane, Bolstar, Ciodrin, Dacthal, Demeton s, Dichlorvos, Dimethoate, Disulfoton, Endrin Ketone, Ethoprop, Famphur, Mirex, Naled, or Oxodiazon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17349, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30031

Pollutant:

Dacthal | Mirex | Oxadiazon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Dacthal, Mirex, or Oxadiazon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8258	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Bromoform
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8258, Bromoform	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	6095	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Cadmium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1, 3.5 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five 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 the 128 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 11 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. None of 16 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6095, Cadmium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5494

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-nine fish fillet samples and 4 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Twenty-one fish fillet and 1 whole fish sample results could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the samples. The 8 fish fillet and 3 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 11/1998 at two locations. Of these total samples, none exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 3 mg/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6095, Cadmium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5032

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 6095, Cadmium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 6095, Cadmium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5321

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three sediment samples taken at 3 locations on the river. One sediment sample result could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 2 acceptable sediment quality samples were collected from 10/2001 through 4/2003. Neither sample exceeded the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 4.98 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. One sample was collected on 11/07/1973, another sample was collected on 10/24/01, and another sample was collected 4/14/03.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6095, Cadmium	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2921

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum based on hardness, and freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average based on hardness.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. The 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, at the International Drain, and at Puente Madero.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17370	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Carbon (organic)
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

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 organic Carbon consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of organic Carbon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of organic Carbon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17370, Carbon (organic)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30049

Pollutant:

Carbon (organic)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations in the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of Organic Carbon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8247	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Carbon tetrachloride
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 16 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8247, Carbon tetrachloride	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5041

Pollutant:

1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinylidene Chloride | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17344	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Carbophenothion \| Dichlofenthion \| Dioxathion \| Ethion \| Fenitrothion \| Fensulfothion \| Fenthion \| Malathion \| Methidathion \| Methyl Parathion \| Parathion \| Tokuthion
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Ethion, Carbophenothion, Dichlofenthion, Dioxathion, Parathion, Fenitrothion, Fensulfothion, Fenthion, Malathion, Methidathion, Methyl Parathion, and Tokuthion consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Ethion, Carbophenothion, Dichlofenthion, Dioxathion, Parathion, Fenitrothion, Fensulfothion, Fenthion, Malathion, Methidathion, Methyl Parathion, or Tokuthion or the sediment fractions of Parathion, or Methyl Parathion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Ethion, Carbophenothion, Dichlofenthion, Dioxathion, Parathion, Fenitrothion, Fensulfothion, Fenthion, Malathion, Methidathion, Methyl Parathion, or Tokuthion or the sediment fractions of Parathion, or Methyl Parathion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17344, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29845

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Ethion, Carbophenothion, Dichlofenthion, Dioxathion, Parathion, Fenitrothion, Fensulfothion, Fenthion, Malathion, Methidathion, Methyl Parathion, or Tokuthion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17344, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30029

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion | Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Parathion, or Methyl Parathion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17347	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chlorfenvinphos \| Chlorpyrifos, methyl \| Cuomaphos \| Dicrotophos \| Dyfonate (Fonofos or Fonophos) \| Fenchlorphos \| Leptophos \| Merphos \| Mevinphos \| Tetrachlorvinphos
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

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 Chlorfenvinphos, Cuomaphos, Dicrotophos, Fenchchlorphos, Dyfonate, Leptophos, Merphos, Mevinphos, Tetrachlorvinphos, and Chlorpyrifos Methyl consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chlorfenvinphos, Cuomaphos, Dicrotophos, Fenchchlorphos, Dyfonate, Leptophos, Merphos, Mevinphos, Tetrachlorvinphos, or Chlorpyrifos Methyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chlorfenvinphos, Cuomaphos, Dicrotophos, Fenchchlorphos, Dyfonate, Leptophos, Merphos, Mevinphos, Tetrachlorvinphos, or Chlorpyrifos Methyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17347, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29852

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Chlorfenvinphos, Cuomaphos, Dicrotophos, Fenchchlorphos, Dyfonate, Leptophos, Merphos, Mevinphos, Tetrachlorvinphos, or Chlorpyrifos Methyl for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8259	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chlorobenzene (mono)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the Calilfornia Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8259, Chlorobenzene (mono)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4457	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chromium (total)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sediment sample exceeded 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 the 157 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. One of 17 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4457, Chromium (total)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4457, Chromium (total)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5260

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-two samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Twenty-three water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 29 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 5/1984. Of these total samples, none exceed the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) 1,724 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Fifty-two samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 2/1973 through 2/1985. Twenty-seven samples were collected from 1973-1979, and 25 samples were collected from 1980-1985.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4457, Chromium (total)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5026

Pollutant:

Arsenic | Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4457, Chromium (total)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2928

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 through December 2003. Of the 98 monthly samples, 0 were in exceedance of the chronic criteria. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/99 through 11/6/99 on. None of the 9 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected at three locations from 6/11/96 through 12/4/96. None of the 6 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA: freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average based on hardness and freshwater acute maximum = 1724 ppb.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

All samples, but the 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. The 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, at the International Drain, and at Puente Madero.

Temporal Representation:

The 98 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 through December 2003. The 9 samples were collected monthly from 10/31/99 through 11/6/99. The 6 samples were collected on six days from 6/11/96 to 12/4/96.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4457, Chromium (total)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5247

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three sediment quality samples were taken at 3 locations in the river, collected between 10/2001 and 4/2003. Out of these total samples, 1 exceeded the PEC Criteria. The exceedence was found in a sample collected on 4/16/2003 from near the International Boundary in Calexico, CA (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 111 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., USGS Station No. 330559115385601 at Lack Road near Calipatria, Ca, USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 10/2001 through 4/2003. One sample was collected in 2001, no samples were collected in 2002, and 2 samples were collected in 2003. The exceedence was found in a sample collected on 4/16/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	8240	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Chrysene (C1-C4)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 5326 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5326 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 in the Final Use Rating. 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 12 water samples exceeded the CTR criteria. None of 15 sediment samples exceeded sediment guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8240, Chrysene (C1-C4)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5326

Pollutant:

Chrysene (C1-C4)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 1,290 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8240, Chrysene (C1-C4)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8240, Chrysene (C1-C4)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4437	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Cyanide
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 5046 and 5035 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. The results of Line of Evidence No. 5046 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5267 in the Final Use Rating. The results of Line of Evidence No. 5035 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence Nos. 5240 and 2923 in the Final Use Rating. One of the samples was in exceedance of 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 129 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 16 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from this water. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4437, Cyanide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5267

Pollutant:

Cyanide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nineteen water samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Four water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 15 acceptable water quality samples were collected from 5/1977 through 9/1979. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion of 220,000 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 located near International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Nineteen samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 5/1977 through 9/1979. Three samples were collected in 1977, 10 samples were collected in 1978, and 6 samples were collected in 1979.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4437, Cyanide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5046

Pollutant:

Cyanide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One water quality sample was collected and analyzed in 7/2003 at 1 location along the New River. This sample did not exceed the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 220000 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Sample was collected from the New River at the International Boundary.

Temporal Representation:

One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected and analyzed in 7/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4437, Cyanide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5035

Pollutant:

Cyanide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One water quality sample was collected and analyzed biannually in 7/2003 at 1 location along the New River. This sample did not exceed the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 22 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Sample was collected from the New River at the International Boundary.

Temporal Representation:

One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected and analyzed in 7/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4437, Cyanide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2923

Pollutant:

Cyanide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 to December 2003 on the New River at the International Boundary. Of the 98 monthly samples, 1 was in exceedance of the chronic criteria and 1 was in exceedance of the acute criteria. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB at three locations on the New River from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. None of the 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999 on the New River. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average = 5.2 ppb and freshwater acute maximum = 22 ppb.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4437, Cyanide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5240

Pollutant:

Cyanide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nineteen samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Four water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 15 acceptable water quality samples were collected from 5/1977 through 9/1979. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 22 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 located near International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	8256	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Dibenz[a,h]anthracene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8256, Dibenz[a,h]anthracene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17357	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Dibenzothiophene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Dibenzothiophene consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of Dibenzothiophene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of Dibenzothiophene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17357, Dibenzothiophene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29862

Pollutant:

Dibenzothiophene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 10/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of Dibenzothiophene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Eight water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected biannually from 10/2002 through 5/2004 at the International boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17357, Dibenzothiophene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30038

Pollutant:

Dibenzothiophene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of Dibenzothiophene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8260	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Dichlorobromomethane
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8260, Dichlorobromomethane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8249	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Dichloromethane
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 5 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8249, Dichloromethane	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5045

Pollutant:

Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide | Vinyl chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Five water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed in 5/2002 and 7/2003 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 4000 ug/l Methyl Bromide, 1600 ug/l Dichloromethane, and 525 ug/l Vinyl Chloride (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Five water samples were collected. Water samples were collected in 5/2002 and analyzed at all locations. In 7/2003 samples were collected and analyzed from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8244	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Endosulfan
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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. Two fish tissue 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 43 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue criteria. Two of the 43 fish tissue samples exceeded the National Academy of Science fish tissue criteria. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8244, Endosulfan	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5603

Pollutant:

Endosulfan

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river, generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 2 fish fillet samples collected at one location exceeded the NAS tissue guideline. At the Westmorland location exceedances were found in; 1 channel catfish fillet composite sample collected on 3/13/1979, and 1 channel catfish single fish fillet sample collected on 11/18/1988 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8244, Endosulfan	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5489

Pollutant:

Endosulfan

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 20,000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	8231	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Endosulfan sulfate
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8231, Endosulfan sulfate	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17364	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Endosulfan sulfate \| alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) \| beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Endosulfan 1, Endosulfan 2, and Endosulfan Sulfate consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Endosulfan 1, Endosulfan 2, or Endosulfan Sulfate for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Endosulfan 1, Endosulfan 2, or Endosulfan Sulfate for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17364, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30041

Pollutant:

Endosulfan sulfate | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Endosulfan 1, Endosulfan 2, or Endosulfan Sulfate for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4420	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Endrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Eight 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 the 24 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 20 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from this water. None of 43 fish tissue samples exceeded Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or National Academy of Science fish tissue guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5268

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-eight water samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Fifty-two water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 6 acceptable water quality samples were collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion of 0.81 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Fifty-eight samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Four samples were collected in 1969, 53 samples were collected from 1970-1979, no samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1992.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5490

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 1000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5611

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5262

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-eight water samples were taken at 2 locations on the river. Fifty-two water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 6 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Of these total samples, none exceed the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) 0.086 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Fifty-eight samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 8/1969 through 4/1992. Four samples were collected in 1969, 53 samples were collected from 1970-1979, 0 samples were collected from 1980-1989, and 1 sample was collected from 1990-1992.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2944

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. All samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.013 ppb. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 0.086 ppb and freshwater chronic maximum = 0.036 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4420, Endrin	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8232	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Endrin aldehyde
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8232, Endrin aldehyde	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8252	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Ethion
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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 43 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8252, Ethion	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5491

Pollutant:

Ethion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 2000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	8263	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Ethylbenzene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8263, Ethylbenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8233	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Fluoranthene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of evidence No. 5327 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because it only reported on one sample. According to Table 3.1 the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5327 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 for the Final Use Rating. 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 15 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8233, Fluoranthene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8233, Fluoranthene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8233, Fluoranthene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5327

Pollutant:

Fluoranthene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 2,230 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	8234	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Fluorene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 5328 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the listing policy the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5328 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 in the Final Use Rating. 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 15 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8234, Fluorene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8234, Fluorene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8234, Fluorene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5328

Pollutant:

Fluorene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 536 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4333	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Heptachlor
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 2.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three 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 the 18 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 42 fish tissue samples exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4333, Heptachlor	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5621

Pollutant:

Heptachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4333, Heptachlor	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4333, Heptachlor	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2945

Pollutant:

Heptachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. All samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.010 ppb. The detection limit was greater than the chronic criteria and hence the data could not be assessed in comparison to the chronic criteria. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 0.52 ppb and freshwater chronic maximum = 0.0038 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4334	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Heptachlor epoxide
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four 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 the 18 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 2 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Asessment fish tissue guideline. None of 42 fish tissue samples exceeded the National Academy of Science Fish tissue guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4334, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2946

Pollutant:

Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 0.52 ppb and freshwater chronic maximum = 0.0038 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4334, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5629

Pollutant:

Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4334, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5492

Pollutant:

Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Thirty-nine fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and it could not be determined that the detection limit was not below the criteria concentration or the constituent was not analyzed in the sample. The 2 fish fillet samples that were acceptable were collected on 11/11/1998/1980 and 12/09/1999. Neither sample exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 4 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Field procedures described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. Used CDFG's Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4334, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17365	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Heptachlor \| Heptachlor epoxide
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 Heptachlor, and Heptachlor Epoxide consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Heptachlor, or Heptachlor Epoxide for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Heptachlor, or Heptachlor Epoxide for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17365, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30042

Pollutant:

Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Heptachlor, or Heptachlor Epoxide for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17367	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB \| Methoxychlor \| alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH) \| beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH)
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 alpha-HCH, beta-HCH, Hexachlorobenzene, and Methoxychlor consistent with Listing Policy section 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of alpha-HCH, beta-HCH, Hexachlorobenzene, or Methoxychlor for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of alpha-HCH, beta-HCH, Hexachlorobenzene, or Methoxychlor for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17367, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30046

Pollutant:

Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Methoxychlor | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH) | beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations in the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of alpha-HCH, beta-HCH, Hexachlorobenzene, or Methoxychlor for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8264	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Hexachlorobutadiene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8264, Hexachlorobutadiene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8253	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (mixture)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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. Three 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. Three of 43 fish tissue samples exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8253, Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (mixture)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

6744

Pollutant:

Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (mixture)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	8257	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Indeno[1,2,3-cd]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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8257, Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5044

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twelve water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005. Samples wre not collected from each location every sampling round.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4454	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Lead
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the water samples exceeded the water qualty 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 128 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 17 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4454, Lead	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2924

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 through December 2003 on the New River at the International Boundary. Of the 98 monthly samples, 1 was in exceedance of the chronic criteria and none were in exceedance of the acute criteria. Samples were also collected on the New River by the RWQCB at 3 locations from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. None of these 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999 on the New River. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average based on hardness. CTR: freshwater acute maximum based on hardness.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. The 6 samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, and also at the International Drain and Puente Madero.

Temporal Representation:

The 98 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 through December 2003. The 6 samples were collected on 6 days from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996 and the 9 samples were collected monthly from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4454, Lead	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5027

Pollutant:

Lead | Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Lead, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4454, Lead	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4454, Lead	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5323

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 128 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. One sample was collected on 11/07/1973, another sample was collected on 10/24/01, and another sample was collected 4/14/03.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	8241	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three 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 14 sediment samples exceeded the sediment qualty guidelines. None of 43 fish tissue samples exceeded Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or National Academy of Science fish tissue guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8241, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8241, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5493

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 30 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8241, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

6738

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	8250	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Methyl bromide
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 5 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8250, Methyl bromide	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5045

Pollutant:

Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide | Vinyl chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Five water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed in 5/2002 and 7/2003 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Five water samples were collected. Water samples were collected in 5/2002 and analyzed at all locations. In 7/2003 samples were collected and analyzed from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8242	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Naphthalene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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. Line of Evidence No. 5330 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5330 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 in the Final Use Rating. 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 15 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8242, Naphthalene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8242, Naphthalene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5330

Pollutant:

Naphthalene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 561 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	8235	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 5270 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5270 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5042 in the Final Use Rating. 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 15 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from this water. None of 17 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8235, Nickel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8235, Nickel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8235, Nickel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5248

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three sediment quality samples were taken at 3 locations in the river, collected between 10/2001 and 4/2003. Of these total samples, none exceeded the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 48.6 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River locations: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., USGS Station No. 330559115385601 at Lack Road near Calipatria, Ca, USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 10/2001 through 4/2003. One sample was collected in 2001, no samples were collected in 2002, and 2 samples were collected in 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8235, Nickel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5270

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six water samples were taken at 1 location on the river. Five water sample results could not be used in the assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the sample results were zero and the detection limit could not be determined. The 1 acceptable water quality sample was collected on 11/28/1978. This sample did not exceed the CTR Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion of 4,600 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Six samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 11/1978 through 4/1981. One sample was collected in 1978, no samples were collected in 1979, 4 samples were collected in 1980, and 1 sample was collected in 1981.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8235, Nickel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5033

Pollutant:

Nickel | Silver

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17350	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Oxychlordane \| Perylene (Dibenz(de,kl)anthracene) \| Phorate \| Phosmet \| Phosphamidon \| Sulfotep \| Tedion \| Thionazin \| Trichlorfon \| Trichloronate
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Oxychlordane, Perylene, Phorate, Phosmet, Phosphamidon, Sulfotep, Tedion, Thionazin, Trichloronate, and Trichlorfon consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Oxychlordane, Perylene, Phorate, Phosmet, Phosphamidon, Sulfotep, Tedion, Thionazin, Trichloronate, or Trichlorfon or the sediment fractions of Oxychlordane, Perylene, or Tedion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Oxychlordane, Perylene, Phorate, Phosmet, Phosphamidon, Sulfotep, Tedion, Thionazin, Trichloronate, or Trichlorfon or the sediment fractions of Oxychlordane, Perylene, or Tedion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17350, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30033

Pollutant:

Oxychlordane | Perylene (Dibenz(de,kl)anthracene) | Tedion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of Oxychlordane, Perylene, or Tedion for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17350, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29855

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Oxychlordane, Perylene, Phorate, Phosmet, Phosphamidon, Sulfotep, Tedion, Thionazin, Trichloronate, or Trichlorfon for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8243	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Phenanthrene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 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. Line of Evidence No. 5331 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. The results of Line of Evidence No. 5331 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 in the Final Use Rating. 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 15 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8243, Phenanthrene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5331

Pollutant:

Phenanthrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 1,170 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 8243, Phenanthrene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17354	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Propazine \| Terbuthylazine
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

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 Propazine, and Terbuthylazine consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Propazine, and Terbuthylazine for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of Propazine, and Terbuthylazine for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17354, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29859

Pollutant:

Propazine | Terbuthylazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of Propazine, or Terbuthylazine for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8236	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 5332 received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Since they are assessing the same standard, the results of Line of Evidence No. 5332 will be combined with the results from Line of Evidence No. 5107 in the Final Use Rating. 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 15 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8236, Pyrene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5107

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005, in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8236, Pyrene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 8236, Pyrene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5332

Pollutant:

Pyrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment quality sample was taken at 1 location along the river, collected on 7/11/1986. This sample did not exceed the PEC Criteria (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 1,520 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on 7/11/1986.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17361	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Salinity
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 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 Salinity consistent with Listing Policy section 3.2. No evaluation guideline for Salinity for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there is no appropriate evaluation guideline, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guideline for Salinity for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17361, Salinity	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29867

Pollutant:

Salinity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 3 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for Salinity for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Seven water samples were collected. Water samples were collected from the International Boundary and at the outlet to the Salton Sea sampling locations in 4/2003, 11/2003, and 5/2004. In 5/2002 a sample was collected from the Drop 2 sampling location only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8245	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Silver
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8245, Silver	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5033

Pollutant:

Nickel | Silver

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17356	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Streptococcus, fecal
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 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 fecal Streptococcus consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guideline for the total density of fecal Streptococcus for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of fecal Streptococcus for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17356, Streptococcus, fecal	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29861

Pollutant:

Streptococcus, fecal

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eleven water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 4 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for Streptococcus for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Eleven water samples were collected. Water samples were collected from all four sampling locations in 5/2002 and 10/2002. In 4/2003 samples were collected from the International Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations only. In 5/2004 a sample was collected from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8265	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Tetrachloroethylene/PCE
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8265, Tetrachloroethylene/PCE	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4469	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Total Dissolved Solids
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 the 97 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4469, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2929

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Freshwater Replenishment

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 to December 2003 on the New River at the International Boundary. Of the 97 monthly samples, 12-month averages were calculated and 0 were in exceedance of the criteria. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB on the New River at 3 locations from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. None of these 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999 on the New River. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) from 1998 to 2003 at 1 location on the New River. Twelve-month averages were calculated and none of these 54 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: Maximum = 4500 mg/L and Annual Average = 4000 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Most samples were collected on the New River at the International Boundary. For the 6 samples, they were collected on the New River at the International Boundary, and at both the International Drain and Puente Madero. The 54 samples were collected at the New River Sea outlet.

Temporal Representation:

The 97 samples were collected monthly from June 1995 to December 2003. The 6 samples were collected on 6 days from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996, and the 9 samples were collected monthly from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999. The 54 samples were collected monthly from 6/1/1998 to 1/12/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 97 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided. Also used Imperial Irrigation District (IID) SOPs.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17355	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel is used to refer to the dissolved fractions of Diesel Range Organics. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17355, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30037

Pollutant:

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 11/2003 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the sediment fractions of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel, used to refer to the dissolved fractions of Diesel Range Organics (dro), for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Eight sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 11/2003, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17355, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29860

Pollutant:

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 11/2003 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the dissolved fraction of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel, used to refer to the dissolved fractions of Diesel Range Organics (dro),for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Eight water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected biannually from 5/2002 through 11/2003 at the International boundary and near the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8267	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Trichloroethylene/TCE
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8267, Trichloroethylene/TCE	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8251	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Vinyl chloride
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 15 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8251, Vinyl chloride	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5045

Pollutant:

Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide | Vinyl chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Five water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed in 5/2002 and 7/2003 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Five water samples were collected. Water samples were collected in 5/2002 and analyzed at all locations. In 7/2003 samples were collected and analyzed from the International Boundary only.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17345	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	alpha-Chlordene \| gama-Chlordene
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess alpha-Chlordene, and gamma-Chlordene consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of alpha-Chlordene, or gamma-Chlordene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of alpha-Chlordene, or gamma-Chlordene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17345, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29846

Pollutant:

alpha-Chlordene | gama-Chlordene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of alpha-Chlordene, or gamma-Chlordene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17345, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30030

Pollutant:

alpha-Chlordene | gama-Chlordene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of alpha-Chlordene, or gamma-Chlordene for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4405	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three 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 the 18 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from this water. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4405, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4405, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2942

Pollutant:

alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. All samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.011 ppb. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 0.22 ppb. CTR: freshwater chronic maximum = 0.056 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4405, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8228	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8228, alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	8229	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 14 samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8229, beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4406	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three 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 18 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 14 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from this water. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4406, beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5042

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4406, beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2943

Pollutant:

beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by the RWQCB at four locations on the New River in 2003. All samples were non-detects with a detection limit of 0.018 ppb. Therefore, there were no exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004C).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum = 0.22 ppb. CTR: freshwater chronic maximum = 0.056 ppb as a 4-day average.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at four locations on the New River, from the international boundary to the outlet to the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 4/17/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4406, beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5029

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17340	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	cis-Nonachlor \| trans-Nonachlor
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

Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess cis-Nonachlor, and trans-Nonachlor consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved and sediment fractions of cis-Nonachlor, or trans-Nonachlor for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved and sediment fractions of cis-Nonachlor, or trans-Nonachlor the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17340, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30026

Pollutant:

cis-Nonachlor | trans-Nonachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the sediment fractions of cis-Nonachlor, or trans-Nonachlor for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Ten sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17340, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29839

Pollutant:

cis-Nonachlor | trans-Nonachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for dissolved fractions of cis-Nonachlor, or trans-Nonachlor for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17341	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH)
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under these sections a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess delta-BHC consistent with Listing Policy sections 3.1 and 3.6. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of delta-BHC for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved or sediment fractions of delta-BHC for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17341, delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

30025

Pollutant:

delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight sediment quality samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for the sediment fraction of delta-BHC for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Eight sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2004, in May and October from both sampling locations. Samples were not collected from either sampling location in October of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 17341, delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH)	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29840

Pollutant:

delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guideline for dissolved fraction of delta-BHC for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17645	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	m-Dichlorobenzene
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

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 19 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17645, m-Dichlorobenzene	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5039

Pollutant:

m-Dichlorobenzene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 2600 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Nineteen water samples were collected. Water samples were collected and analyzed biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and the outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Another sample was collected from the International Boundary location in 6/2003. The rest of the locations were sampled twice in 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	17348	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	o,p'-DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) \| o,p-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) \| o,p-DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) \| p,p-DDMU
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

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 o,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, and p,p'-DDMU consistent with Listing Policy section 3.1. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of o,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, or p,p'-DDMU for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Because there are no appropriate evaluation guidelines, staff are unable to make a Listing decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing these water segment-pollutant combinations on the section 303(d) list. 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. No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of o,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, or p,p'-DDMU for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that meet the requirements of section 6.1.3 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.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 17348, Multiple Pollutants	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

29853

Pollutant:

o,p'-DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | o,p-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | o,p-DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | p,p-DDMU

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten water quality samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/2002 through 5/2004 at 2 locations along the New River (SWAMP, 2006).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of o,p'-DDD, o,p'-DDE, o,p'-DDT, or p,p'-DDMU for the protection of human, animal or aquatic life in fresh waters could be found that met the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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	4450	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	pH
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.1, 3.6, and 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status while under section 3.9, a minimum of two lines of evidence are needed to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.6 the site does not have significant sediment toxicity and the pollutant is not likely to cause or contribute to the toxic effect. The benthic community is not impacted. 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 sediment quality guideline used complies with the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 3. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 4. Four of 8895 samples were in exceedance of the water quality objective, and these do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The benthic community in this water body is not impacted. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB 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.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2915

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Freshwater Replenishment

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected at nine stations on one day in May and one day in June of 2001. There were 18 samples and 0 exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: Minimum = 6.0 s.u., Maximum = 9.0 s.u.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Evan Hughes Highway and the International Boundary stations, in addition to 7 other locations which could not be determined based on unrecognizable sample IDs.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 5/30/2001 and 6/20/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC used by RWQCB staff.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2916

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Freshwater Replenishment

Number of Samples:

192

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected monthly by the RWQCB at one station on the New River. During each monthly sample, automatic readings were taken each hour from 7 A.M. until 2 P.M. In evaluating the pH data, the daily maximum and minimum were compared to the criteria. A total of 192 readings were taken (on 24 dates). Assessing the data based on the daily maximum/minimum, there were 0 exceedances out of 24 days of measurements (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: Minimum = 6.0 s.u., Maximum = 9.0 s.u.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Unknown.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly from 8/1/1995 to 7/8/1997.

Environmental Conditions:

Flow, water temperature, DO, turbidity, and conductivity were all measured.

QAPP Information:

QA/QC used by RWQCB staff.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2917

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Freshwater Replenishment

Number of Samples:

6012

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB during June of 1993 and May and July of 1999. There were a total of 6012 measurements over 39 days. The objective was exceeded a total of 16 times on 3 days (5/14/99, 7/8/99, and 7/16/99). Assessing the data based on the daily maximum/minimum this means there were 3 exceedances out of 39 days of measurements (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: Minimum = 6.0 s.u., Maximum = 9.0 s.u.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the New River at Mexicali.

Temporal Representation:

Measurements were taken multiple times each day during the following periods: 6/21/93-6/28/93, 5/1/99-5/14/99, and 7/7/99-7/11/99.

Environmental Conditions:

Other information collected includes water temperature, conductivity, and DO.

QAPP Information:

QA/QC used by RWQCB staff.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5336

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

373

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three hundred and seventy-three water quality measurements were taken at 4 locations in the river, generally collected from 10/1963 through 9/2002. Of these total measurements , none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USGS, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: Since the regional waters are somewhat alkaline, pH shall range from 6.0-9.0 (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Measurements were collected at the following New River location: USGS Station No. 10255550 located near Westmorland, Ca., USGS Station No. 330559115385601 at Lack Road near Calipatria, Ca, USGS Station No. 10255502 located at Drop 4 near Brawley, Ca, and USGS Station No. 10254970 near the International Boundary in Calexico, Ca.

Temporal Representation:

Three hundred seventy-three measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 10/1963 through 9/2002. Eighty-one measurements were collected from 1963-1969, 221 measurements were collected from 1970-1979, 96 measurements were collected from 1980-1989, 1 measurement was collected from 1990-1999, and 3 measurements were collected from 2000-2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2919

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Freshwater Replenishment

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected monthly by the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) from 1998 through 2003. Samples were collected at one location on the New River. None of these 54 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected monthly in 1996. None of these 12 samples were in exceedance. Samples were collected once a month from January 1997 through March 1998. None of these 15 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected each month in 1999. Twenty samples were collected and there were 0 exceedances (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: Minimum = 6.0 s.u., Maximum = 9.0 s.u.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the New River Salton Sea outlet for the 54 samples. The exact collection location(s) is unknown for the 12, 15 and 20 sample size collections.

Temporal Representation:

The 54 samples were taken monthly from 6/1/1998 through 1/12/2004. The 12 samples were collected monthly from 1/23/1996 through 12/17/1996. The 15 samples were collected once a month from 1/28/1997 through 3/17/1998. The 20 samples were collected from 1/21/1999 through 12/14/1999. Samples were collected once a month, except during April through September when there were 2 samples collected each month.

Environmental Conditions:

For the 20 samples all measurements were taken at a depth of 0.5 meters. Samples were taken twice a month during the warmer months of April through September.

QAPP Information:

Imperial Irrigation District (IID) SOPs.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5117

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty water quality measurements were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 4 locations along the New River. Of these total measurements, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: Since the regional waters are somewhat alkaline, pH shall range from 6.0-9.0 (CRBRWQCB, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Measurements were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, at the Even Hewes Highway overpass near Seeley, CA, Drop 2, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Twenty measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected and biannually, in May and October, from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea location. The Even Hewes location was measured twice in 2002, once in 2003. The Drop 2 location was measured twice in 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4450, pH	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2918

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Freshwater Replenishment

Number of Samples:

2199

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

A total of 2199 measurements were taken over 6 days in April and May of 1999 (4/28/99, 5/6/99, and 5/11/99-5/14/99). The maximum was exceeded 10 times in the 2199 measurements, however, the exceedances were all on one day (5/14/99). Assessing the data based on the daily maximum/minimum, there was 1 exceedance out of 6 days of measurements (CRBRWQCB, 2004c).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Colorado River RWQCB Basin Plan: Daily Minimum = 6.0 s.u., Daily Maximum = 9.0 s.u.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Unknown.

Temporal Representation:

Measurements were taken on 6 days in April and May of 1999 (4/28/99, 5/6/99, and 5/11-14/99). Measurements on the first two dates were taken in the morning and early afternoon. For the period of May 11 through May 14, measurements were taken every 2 minutes for the duration of those four days.

Environmental Conditions:

Other parameters were measured, including water temperature, specific conductance, DO, turbidity, ORP, chloride, ammonium, and nitrate.

QAPP Information:

QA/QC used by RWQCB staff.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	8226	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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. There were a total of forty-six fish tissue samples collected. When compared to the OEHHA 20 ug/kg threshold for consumption, there were 16 exceedances out of 43 acceptable fish tissue samples taken, in three of the fish tissue samples collected Hexachlorobenzene was not analyzed. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list. 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. At a minimum, 16 out of 43 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 3.1 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 met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 8226, Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5422

Pollutant:

Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples were taken at 2 locations in the river. Three fish fillet samples could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed in the sample. The 38 fish fillet samples and 5 whole fish samples that were acceptable were generally collected from 6/1978 through 12/1999. Of these total samples, 14 fish fillet samples and 2 whole fish samples collected at two locations exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value. At the Westmorland location exceedances were found in; 6 channel catfish fillet composite samples collected on 5/09/1980, (2)4/22/1982, 6/13/1983, 10/10/1985, and 9/03/1987; 2 channel catfish single fish fillet samples collected on 11/18/1988, and 8/03/1990, and; 3 carp fillet composite samples collected on 4/22/1982, 5/24/1984, and 10/09/1985. At the International Boundary location exceedances were found in; 2 carp fillet composite samples collected on 7/31/1990, and 11/02/1994; 1 carp single fish fillet sample collected on 7/20/1989; 1 sailfin molly whole fish composite sample collected on 10/01/1985, and; 1 tilapia single whole fish sample collected on 5/17/1984 (TSMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 20 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: near the International Boundary, and near Westmorland, CA..

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.


DECISION ID	4470	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Zinc
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	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 section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the sediment 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 out of 128 water samples exceed the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4.Two of 14 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. State Board Review and Conclusion: State Board staff disagrees with the Regional Board's assessment of this water body-pollutant combination. An error was made in applying the Listing Policy table 3.2 minimum number of allowable exceedances needed in this decision. The Lines of Evidence shows that 2 of 17 sediment samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective for zinc and this exceeds the allowable frequency requirement of the Listing Policy Table 3.1. In addition, one line of evidence shows that toxicity was observed in four of four samples. State Water Board staff recommend to List New River for Zinc . The revised recommendation is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the sediment samples exceed the water quality objective, and four of four toxicity samples exceed water quality objectives. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of 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 out of 128 water samples exceed the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4.Three of 17 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Four of four samples showed significant toxicity as compared to control. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that though this water body is impaired for sediment toxicity, these water body-pollutant combinations should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for these pollutants are not being exceeded

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision: The sediment samples exceed the criteria in table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

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 4470, Zinc	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5027

Pollutant:

Lead | Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton Sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4470, Zinc	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

5324

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) Criteria 459 mg/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (MacDonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Three samples were collected. One sample was collected on 11/07/1973, another sample was collected on 10/24/01, and another sample was collected 4/14/03.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Assume samplers used standard USGS methods for sample collection (Wilde, variously dated). Assume analysts used standard analytical methods and quality assurance as described in (USGS, 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4470, Zinc	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4874

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fourteen sediment quality samples were generally collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at 2 locations along the New River. Of these total samples , 2 exceeded the PEC. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 11/04/2003, and 10/04/2004 from the International Boundary location (SWAMP, 2007).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006

Evaluation Guideline:

Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) of 459 mg/kg for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects (Macdonald et al, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the following New River locations: at the International Boundary, and near the outlet to the Salton sea near Calipatria, CA.

Temporal Representation:

Fourteen sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected and analyzed biannually from 5/2002 through 5/2005 at the International Boundary and outlet to the Salton Sea locations. Samples were usually collected in May and October. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 11/04/2003 through 10/04/2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 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 4470, Zinc	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2952

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Toxicity testing data generated from 4 sediment samples. Four of these samples were toxic (SWAMP, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or indigenous aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Significant toxicity as compared to control.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Three stations were sampled, all were situated along the New River from the international boundary with Mexico to the outlet (mouth) of New River into the Salton Sea.

Temporal Representation:

All samples were taken between the spring (May) and the fall (October) of 2002. Toxicity was detected during both seasons.

Environmental Conditions:

The New River flows from Mexico through the Imperial Valley in the Salton Sea. Most of the water flowing through it comes from agricultural return flows.

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4470, Zinc	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2930

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

113

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected by the RWQCB from June 1995 to December 2003 on the New River at the International Boundary. Of the 98 monthly samples, 0 were in exceedance of the criteria. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB on the New River at 3 locations from 6/11/1996 to 12/4/1996. None of these 6 samples were in exceedance. Samples were also collected by the RWQCB from 10/31/1999 to 11/6/1999 on the New River. None of these 9 samples were in exceedance (CRBRWQCB, 2004C).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

CTR: freshwater acute maximum based on hardness and freshwater chronic maximum as a 4-day average based on hardness.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

For the 98 samples, temperature, pH, D.O., and conductivity were also measured.

QAPP Information:

Used RWQCB QA/QC in sample collection. Lab analysis was done by E.S. Babcock & Sons laboratory and a Quality Assurance Manual was provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	6933	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

Pollutant:	Trash
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	Revised
Sources:	Out-of-state source
TMDL Name:	New River Trash TMDL
TMDL Project Code:	17
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA:	09/24/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Line of Evidence No. 2955 is a placeholder line of evidence, containing no data it is instead used to indicate this was a listing made prior to 2006. Based on the applicable factor, the New River Trash TMDL was approved by USEPA on September 24, 2007. The approved TMDL and implementation plan are expected to result in attainment of the standard. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed by USEPA approved TMDL portion of the section 303(d) list.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 6933, Trash	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

2955

Pollutant:

Trash

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Nuisance

Matrix:

Not Specified

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 2006 303(d)

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Unspecified

Temporal Representation:

Unspecified

Environmental Conditions:

Unspecified

QAPP Information:

QA Info Missing

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4137	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

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:	Agricultural Return Flows \| Major Municipal Point Source-dry and/or wet weather discharge \| Out-of-state source
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Conclusion:	303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.

RWQCB Board Staff Decision:	No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed.

SWRCB Board Staff Decision:	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 4137, Nutrients	Region 7
New River (Imperial County)

LOE ID:

4388

Pollutant:

Nutrients

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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)

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):