Final California 2012 Integrated Report( 303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name: Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
Water Body ID: CAR5430001120080808191800
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
24116
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Bifenthrin
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One 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. One of 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Four samples had concentrations less than the quantitation limits and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality criterion concentration. Therefore, the sample was not used in this analysis in accordance with section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24116, Bifenthrin
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22802
 
Pollutant: Bifenthrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 5 water samples were collected from Sand Creek from May to September 2006 representing 1 concentration and 4 samples were not used. 1 of 1 concentrations exceeded the maximum value (0.00093 ug/L). Note: The detection limit of the samples is 0.006 ug/L which is higher than the maximum value, 0.00093 ug/L. 4 samples were below the detection limit, so the 4 samples were not used in this analysis.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: The Board will use the best available technicalinformation to evaluate compliance with the narrative objectives. - the Board will consider one tenth of 96 hour LC50 for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life (CRWQCB, 2006). The one tenth of 96 hour LC50 tested on the most sensitive species in freshwater is 0.00093 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008).
Guideline Reference: Ecotox database
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected monthly from May to September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
25402
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 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 5 samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00083 μg/L for total DDT based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 25402, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 25854
 
Pollutant: DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five samples were collected from Sand Creek and analyzed for DDD between May and September 2006. None of the available 5 samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit for DDD of 0.00083 ug/L based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007a)Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000)Inland Surface Waters based on drinking water and aquatic organism consumption. The criteria are based on human health protection for carcinogenicity at 1-in-a-million risk level (30-day average) for DDD of 0.00083 ug/L.
Objective/Criterion 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
  Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected at monthly intervals between May 2006 and September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24013
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One 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. One of 5 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, 1 of 5 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average concentration criterion and this does no 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24013, Diazinon
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22803
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 5 water samples were collected from Sand Creek from May through September 2006, representing 5 4-day average concentrations and 5 1-hour average concentrations. 1 of 5 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.10 ug/L. 1 of 5 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion 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
  Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
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 Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected monthly from May through September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
25464
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One 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. One of 5 samples exceeded the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) based on a 4-day average for Endrin (0.036 mg/L) 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 25464, Endrin
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 25859
 
Pollutant: Endrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five (5) water samples were collected from Sand Creek between May and September 2006. One of the available 5 samples exceeds the criterion for Endrin (0.036 (g/L) for freshwater aquatic life protection.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB. 2007a)Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- National Ambient Water Quality Criteria (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) (USEPA, 2000, USEPA, 2006). The criteria is based on a continuous concentration (4-day average) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life and should be below 0.036 (g/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected at monthly intervals between May 2006 and September 2006
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
27023
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Methomyl
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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. One of 5 water samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline for the narrative toxicity 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 5 water samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline for methomyl (California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Methomyl Criteria of 0.52 μg/L (4-day average criterion) and 5.5 μg/L (1-hour maximum criterion)) and, therefore, one sample exceeds the narrative toxicity 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 27023, Methomyl
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 26199
 
Pollutant: Methomyl
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five water samples were collected from Sand Creek, under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program, monthly between May and September 2006. One of the 5 water samples contained methomyl at concentrations that exceed the Evaluation Guideline for the 4-day average concentration (0.52 ug/L). One of the 5 water samples contained methomyl at concentrations that also exceed the Evaluation Guideline for the 1-hour maximum concentration (5.5 ug/L).
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment methomyl 4-day average concentration (0.52 ug/L) and 1-hour maximum concentration (5.5 ug/L).
Guideline Reference: Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methomyl to Aquatic Organisms in the San Joaquin River System - Administrative Report 96-6
 
Spatial Representation: Water samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Water samples were collected from Sand Creek monthly May and September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data Quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826 ) requirements.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24164
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seven 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 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 of the 8 samples fell below the minimum criterion water quality objective listed in the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24164, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22815
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Eight samples were taken from Sand Creek during 2006. None of the eight samples fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan the Warm Cold Freshwater Habitat (WARM) criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 5 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at the Highway 4 Bypass in Contra Costa County.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected between May and September 2006. Samples were collected at bi-monthly and monthly intervals.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24165
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Sediment Toxicity
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One 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. One of 1 samples exceeded the narative toxicity objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The recommendation is based on staff findings that only one sample is available. A minimum sample size of two samples is needed for evaluation of data.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24165, Sediment Toxicity
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22817
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Only one sample tested with Hyalella azteca survival.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CVRWQCB, 2007)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 10-day Hyalella azteca sediment toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064
 
Spatial Representation: Sample was collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Sample was collected on August 15, 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Fair. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24117
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Chlorpyrifos
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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. Two samples exceed the narrative toxicity water quality objective.

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. Two of five available calculated 4-day average chlorpyrifos concentrations exceeded the 4-day average chlorpyrifos criterion, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Two of five available 1-hour average chlorpyrifos concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average maximum chlorpyrifos concentration guideline, 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24117, Chlorpyrifos
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22805
 
Pollutant: Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 2
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five water samples were collected from Sand Creek from May to September 2006, representing five calculated 4-day average chlorpyrifos concentrations and five 1-hour average chlorpyrifos concentrations. Two of the five calculated 4-day average chlorpyrifos concentrations exceeded the 4-day average chlorpyrifos criterion of 0.015 ug/L. Two of the five 1-hour average chlorpyrifos concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average chlorpyrifos criterion of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.
Objective/Criterion 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
  Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Chlorpyrifos Criteria: 0.015 ug/L as a 4-day average chlorpyrifos concentration, and 0.025 ug/L as a 1-hour average chlorpyrifos concentration, not to be exceeded more than once every three years.
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 Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected monthly from May to September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
25453
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification 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. Two of 5 samples exceed the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 μg/L for DDE based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms and this exceeds 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 25453, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 25855
 
Pollutant: DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 2
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 5 samples were collected from Sand Creek and analyzed for DDE between May and September 2006. Two of the available 5 samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 ug/L for DDE (DDE-p,p') based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007a)Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000)Inland Surface Waters based on drinking water and aquatic organism consumption. The criteria are based on human health protection for carcinogenicity at 1-in-a-million risk level (30-day average) for DDT should be below 0.00059 ug/L.
Objective/Criterion 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
  Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected at monthly intervals between May 2006 and September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
25454
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification 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. Two of 5 samples exceed the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 μg/L for DDT based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms and this exceeds 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 25454, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 25856
 
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: 5
Number of Exceedances: 2
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five samples were collected from Sand Creek and analyzed for DDT between May and September 2006. Two of the available 5 samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 ug/L for DDT (DDT-p,p') based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007a)Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000)Inland Surface Waters based on drinking water and aquatic organism consumption. The criteria are based on human health protection for carcinogenicity at 1-in-a-million risk level (30-day average) for DDT should be below 0.00059 ug/L.
Objective/Criterion 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
  Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected at monthly intervals between May 2006 and September 2006
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
25463
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification 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. Two of 5 samples exceed the California Toxic Rule /USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria of 0.00014 μg/L for Dieldrin based on continuous concentration (30-day average) for freshwater for aquatic life protection and this exceeds 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 25463, Dieldrin
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 25857
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 2
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five samples were collected from Sand Creek and analyzed for Dieldrin between May 2006 and September 2006. Two of the available 5 samples exceed the CTR criterion for Dieldrin (>0.00014 ug/L).
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB. 2007a)Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000)California Toxic Rule /USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria with a limit of 0.00014 ug/L for Dieldrin (inland surface waters) based on continuous concentration (30-day average) for freshwater for aquatic life protection.
Objective/Criterion 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
  Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected at monthly intervals between May 2006 and September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24025
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Escherichia coli (E. coli)
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Five 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 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. Five of 5 samples exceed the E. Coli objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24025, Escherichia coli (E. coli)
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22816
 
Pollutant: Escherichia coli (E. coli)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Water Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 5
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: The San Joaquin Co Delta Water Quality Coalition collected 5 samples from May 2006 to September 2006. Five out of 5 samples exceeded the evaluation objective.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
  Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
 
Evaluation Guideline: The USEPA E. Coli objective of 235/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA 1986).
Guideline Reference: Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass
Temporal Representation: Sampling occurred from May 2006 to September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24026
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Salinity
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Ten 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 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. Ten of 13 samples exceed the water quality objectives for electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids (collectively “salinity”) and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24026, Salinity
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22831
 
Pollutant: Salinity
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 4
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Five samples were taken from the Sand Creek in 2006. Four of the five samples exceed the California Secondary MCL for Municipal Water Quality Objectives for total dissolved solids in surface water.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The water quality objective used was the California The water quality objective used was the California Secondary MCL recommended level of 500 mg/L. The Basin Plan includes chemical constituent water quality objectives that include (by reference) secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) protective of MUN (CVRWQCB, 2007a).The secondary MCL's for TDS provide a range of values including a recommended level (500 mg/L), upper level (1000 mg/L) and a short-term level (1500 mg/L). The 'recommended' concentration was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water uses. Though individual listing evaluations did not look at the water supply source serving the given geographic area, there are certain areas that receive supply waters (such as the Delta Mendota Canal) that at times may be elevated above the recommended level of the secondary MCL. Where future information is made available to document this to be the case, these water bodies may be re-evaluated in future listing cycles.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
  California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass in Contra Costa County.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected between May 2006 and September 2006. Samples were collected at monthly intervals.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24026, Salinity
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22820
 
Pollutant: Salinity
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 6
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Eight samples were taken from Sand Creek in 2006. Six of the eight samples exceed the California Secondary MCL for Municipal Water Quality Objectives for electrical conductivity in surface water.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The water quality objective used was the California Secondary MCL recommended level of 900 uS/cm. The Basin Plan includes chemical constituent water quality objectives that include (by reference) secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) protective of MUN (CVRWQCB, 2007a).The secondary MCL's for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), upper level (1600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2200 uS/cm). The 'recommended' concentration was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water uses. Though individual listing evaluations did not look at the water supply source serving the given geographic area, there are certain areas that receive supply waters (such as the Delta Mendota Canal) that at times may be elevated above the recommended level of the secondary MCL. Where future information is made available to document this to be the case, these water bodies may be re-evaluated in future listing cycles.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
  California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass in Contra Costa County.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected between May and September 2006. Samples were collected at biweekly intervals.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
24177
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
Pollutant: Unknown Toxicity
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)(2010)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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. Four 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 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. Three of 7 samples exceed the narrative toxicity objective for ceriodaphnia and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, 1 of 6 samples exceed the narrative toxicity objective for fathead minnow and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Lastly, 0 of 5 samples exceed the narrative toxicity objective for selenastrum 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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

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.
 
State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: The decision has not changed. Region 5 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.

After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24177, Unknown Toxicity
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22819
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 5
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Zero of 5 samples tested with Selenastrum capricornutum were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective.
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CVRWQCB, 2007)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day chronic-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-013
 
Spatial Representation: Sample was collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from May 2006 to September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24177, Unknown Toxicity
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22818
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 6
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: One of the 6 samples tested with Pimephales promelas was toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. One sample collected at Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:16 May 2006 (60)
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CVRWQCB, 2007)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012
 
Spatial Representation: Sample was collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from May 2006 to September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 24177, Unknown Toxicity
Region 5     
Sand Creek (tributary to Marsh Creek, Contra Costa County; partly in Delta Waterways, western portion)
 
LOE ID: 22851
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 7
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 3 of the 7 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. Three samples collected at the Highway 4 Bypass exhibited a statistically significant decrease in survival compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:16 May 2006 (16)20 June 2006 (0)18 July 2006 (0)
Data Reference: Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
  Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CVRWQCB, 2007)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012
 
Spatial Representation: Sample was collected from Sand Creek at Highway 4 Bypass.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from May 2006 to September 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):