Draft California 2018 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)
Water Body ID:	CAR5380001020080709164456
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	72619	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board 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 this pollutant. Thirty-three of 61 water samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for E. coli. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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. Thirty-three of 61 samples exceeded the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed 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 not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72619, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21597

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 32 samples from July 2002 to November 2005. Twenty-six out of 32 samples exceeded the evaluation objective.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The 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 at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

Monthly sampling occurred from July 2002 to November 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

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 72619, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60103

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.(Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins).

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 USEPA recommended objective for single sample maximum allowable density of E. coli in freshwater designated beach areas is 235 MPN/100mL.

Guideline Reference:

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72619, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21590

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition collected 13 samples from March 2005 to September 2006. Three out of the 13 samples collected 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:

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 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 at Bear Creek at Kibby Road.

Temporal Representation:

Ssampling occurred monthly during the irrigation season from March 2005 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	73997	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Toxicity
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under sections 4.1 and 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 60004 replaces LOEs 21593, 21592, and 21637 from previous assessments for this waterbody-pollutant combination. Five of thirty six water samples tested for toxicity to three species: Ceriodaphnia dubia, Pimephales promelas, and Selenastrum capricornutum; exhibited significant toxicity. Three of 12 water samples tested for toxicity to Pimephales promelas exhibited significant toxicity. Zero of thirteen samples tested for toxicity to Ceriodahnia dubia exhibited significant toxicity. Three of twenty sediment samples tested for toxicity to Hyalella Azteca exhibited significant toxicity. 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 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 thirty six water samples tested for toxicity to three species: Ceriodaphnia dubia, Pimephales promelas, and Selenastrum capricornutum; exhibited significant toxicity and this does not meet the frequency required in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy to delist this water body-pollutant combination. 4. Three of 12 water samples tested for toxicity to Pimephales promelas exhibited significant toxicity and this does not meet the frequency required in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy to delist this water body-pollutant combination. 5. Three of twenty sediment samples tested for toxicity to Hyalella Azteca exhibited significant toxicity and this does not meet the frequency required in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy to delist this water body-pollutant combination. 6. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from 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:	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 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21638

Pollutant:

Vertebrate 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:

Twelve water samples collected from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road were tested for acute toxicity using a 96-hour acute toxicity test with Pimephales promelas as the test species. Three of the samples exhibited a statistically significant decrease in survival compared to control (the 3 water samples were toxic to Fathead Minnow, a vertebrate species) and violated the narrative toxicity objective. The sample dates of the 3 toxic samples, and the percent of control (in parentheses) are: 27 January 2005 (55), 24 February 2005 (70), and 26 May 2005 (79).

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. 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 Fisher's Exact 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:

Samples were collected from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in June 2001 and monthly from November 2004 to October 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

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 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60004

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-six samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Five of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Ceriodaphnia dubia, survival of Pimephales promelas, and total cell count of Selenastrum capricornutum. The samples that exhibited significant toxicity were ceriodaphia (3 samples and Selanastrum (2 samples). One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 5 Basin Plan.

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:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. This data set reports a simple pass/fail (Yes/NO) code to report toxicity that is equivalent to the SWAMP SL code.

Guideline Reference:

Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms. Fourth Edition. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. EPA-821-R-02-013

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at station 535XBCAKR, Bear Creek at Kibby Rd.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from March 2005 to May 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was collected under the Quality Assurance Project Plan For Monitoring By The East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59125

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sample was collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. The sample did not exhibit significant toxicity. The toxicity test included survival of Hyalella azteca. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

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:

The sample was collected at station 535MER007.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected in July 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60005

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. Two of the samples exhibited significant toxicity to Hyalella Azteca (8/28/08, 10/2/08). The toxicity tests included survival of Hyalella azteca. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

The samples were collected at station 535XBCAKR, Bear Creek at Kibby Rd.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from September 2005 to October 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was collected under the Quality Assurance Project Plan For Monitoring By The East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21591

Pollutant:

Sediment Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

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:

Four sediment samples were collected under the SWAMP program from Bear Creek at Kibby Road and tested for toxicity using Hyalella azteca (an amphipod invertebrate). One of the 4 samples had significantly lower survival (83%) relative to control. The toxic sample was collected from Bear Creek at Kibby Road on 17 September 2002.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Spatial Representation:

Sediment samples were collected from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 9 October 2001, 28 May 2002, 17 September 2002, and 8 April 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21601

Pollutant:

Sediment Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

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:

Five sediment samples were collected from Bear Creek at Kibby Road for the Irrigated Lands Reporting Program (ILRP). The 5 samples were tested for toxicity by comparing Hyalella azteca (an amphipod invertebrate) survival to control survival. None of the 5 samples had significantly reduced survival compared to control.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Bear Creek at Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on 10 May 2005, 12 July 2005, 20 September 2005, 3 May 2006, and 6 August 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 for the ILRP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21592

Pollutant:

Plant 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:

Twelve water samples were collected from Bear Creek under the Irrigated Lands Reporting Program (ILRP) and tested for toxicity by comparing the growth (total cell counts) of Selenastrum capricornutum to control. None of 12 samples exhibited reduced total cell counts (none 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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected approximately monthly between 21 March 2005 and 12 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.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21593

Pollutant:

Invertebrate Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Under the Irrigated Lands Reporting Program (ILRP), the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition collected 16 samples from March 2005 to September 2006. The samples were tested for acute toxicity using 4-day toxicity test with Ceriodaphnia dubia as the test species. Two samples (collected on 10 May 2005 and 17 May 2006) exhibited a statistically significant decrease in survival compared to the control (5% and 0% survival, compared to control, respectively).

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Bear Creek at Kibby Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred mostly monthly, but occasionally multi-weekly or semi-annually between March 2005 and 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.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

25347

Pollutant:

Invertebrate Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirteen water samples were collected under the SWAMP Program from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road between June 2001 and October 2005. The samples were tested for acute toxicity using 48-hour acute toxicity tests with Ceriodaphnia dubia as the test species. Zero of the samples exhibited a significant decrease in survival (none of the samples were toxic to an invertebrate species).

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Fisher¿s Exact with 48-hour acute-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred in June 2001 and monthly from November 2004 to October 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California¿s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73997, Toxicity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21637

Pollutant:

Vertebrate 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:

Thirteen water samples were collected from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road and tested for toxicity using 94-hour toxicity tests with Pimephales promelas as a test species. None of the 13 samples exhibited a significant decrease in survival compared to control (none 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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Bear Creek at Kibby Road.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected at irregular intervals ranging from monthly to semi-annually between March 2005 and September 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California¿s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	87932	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Aldicarb
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of one sample exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD 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:	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:	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 87932, Aldicarb	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60138

Pollutant:

Aldicarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for aldicarb, 6.33 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 63.3 ug/L) for Lepomis macrochirus (Bluegill sunfish); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87984	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Ammonia as N, 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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD 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:	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:	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 87984, Ammonia as N, Total	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

78458

Pollutant:

Ammonia as N, Total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sixteen water samples were collected from Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition and were analyzed for Ammonia as N, Total, pH and temperature. Samples collected from the same monitoring station and on the same date were averaged before they were assessed. A total of 16 samples were assessed and all of the analytical results were below the calculated CMC Evaluation Guideline value.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The 1-hour average concentration (acute criterion or CMC) of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg N/L) for freshwater where salmonid fish are present, which is not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average, is calculated using the following equation: CMC=0.275/(1+10^(7.204 - pH)) + 39.0/(1+10^(pH - 7.204)).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at one monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR].

Temporal Representation:

Ammonia data was collected monthly between 2/12/2007 and 7/20/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data collected under the QAPP for the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87986	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Anthracene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the criteria for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87986, Anthracene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60139

Pollutant:

Anthracene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Anthracene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for anthracene is 845 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	71264	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. One of 34 available water samples results exceeded the water quality objectives for the COLD and MUN beneficial uses. A single sediment sample did not exceed the water quality objective for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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. One of 34 available water samples results exceeded the water quality objectives for the COLD and MUN beneficial uses and a single sediment sample did not exceed the water quality objective for the COLD beneficial use, and this sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 71264, Arsenic	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60141

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for arsenic is 0.010 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71264, Arsenic	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60140

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Arsenic.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life 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 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins).

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for arsenic is 33 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71264, Arsenic	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7919

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 18 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the USEPA Primary MCL for total arsenic of 10 ug/L

Data Reference:

San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Total arsenic levels must not exceed the USEPA Primary MCL of 10 ug/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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 Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between June 28, 2001 and June 26, 2003

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71264, Arsenic	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59949

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 0.150 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84895	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Atrazine
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 16 available water sample results exceeded the water quality objectives for either the COLD or MUN beneficial uses. 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 CWA 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 the 16 available water sample results exceeded the water quality objectives for either COLD or MUN, and this sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84895, Atrazine	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59951

Pollutant:

Atrazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for atrazine is 1 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84895, Atrazine	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59950

Pollutant:

Atrazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Atrazine, 43 ug/L, is a an EC50 for Lemna gibba (duckweed); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	88207	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of zero samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of zero samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88207, Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59952

Pollutant:

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos methyl. Sixteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 National Recommended Water Quality criterion for Azinphos Methyl (Guthion) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is a maximum of 0.01 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	88184	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Benzo(a)anthracene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88184, Benzo(a)anthracene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59953

Pollutant:

Benzo(a)anthracene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Benzo(a)anthracene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Benzo(a)anthracene is 1050 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87439	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87439, Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60021

Pollutant:

Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Benzo(a)pyrene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Benzo(a)Pyrene is 1,450 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84496	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant - one line based on eight water sample results and the other based on one sediment sample result. The reporting level for eight water samples is greater than the evaluation guideline value. Therefore, none of the samples were evaluated for exceedances; i.e., 0 samples and 0 exceedances. The single available sediment result did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 the available water samples were evaluated for exceedances because the reporting levels were greater than the evaluation guideline value, the single available sediment result did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use, and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84496, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60023

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value for Bifenthrin.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for bifenthrin, 0.043 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.43 ug/g OC). The LC50 (0.43 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for bifenthrin from Amweg et al. (2005) and Amweg and Weston (2007).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84496, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60022

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight samples were collected and analyzed for Bifenthrin. The reporting level for all eight samples is greater than the evaluation guideline value. Therefore, none of the samples were evaluated for exceedances; i.e., 0 samples, 0 exceedances.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Bifenthrin, 0.0006 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/18/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87609	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Boron
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for AG. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for AG 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:	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:	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 87609, Boron	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

79551

Pollutant:

Boron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Boron.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

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:

Water Quality for Agriculture, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1985, contains criteria protective of various agricultural uses of water, including irrigation of various types of crops and stock watering. At or below the limits presented in the Water Quality Goals tables, agricultural uses of water should not be limited. These criteria were used to translate narrative water quality objectives for chemical constituents that prohibit chemicals in concentrations that would impair agricultural uses of water. The criteria for boron is 700 ug/L (0.7 mg/L).

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985)

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	71322	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from three lines of evidence for this water body-pollutant combination. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that none of 14 available water sample results exceeded the California Toxics Rule for the Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM) beneficial use, none of an additional 16 available water sample results exceeded the primary MCL for the Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN) beneficial use and a single sediment sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the Cold Freshwater Habitat (COLD) beneficial use; these results do not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 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 available water sample results exceeded the water quality objective for Warm, none of an additional 16 available water sample results exceeded the water quality objective for MUN and a single sediment sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 71322, Cadmium	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7923

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:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 14 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Dissolved Cadmium levels should not exceed the calculated limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average dissolved)=(EXP(1.128*LN(hardness)-3.6867))*(1.136672-(LN(hardness)*0.041838)) (CTR)

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from June 28, 2001 to November 21, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71322, Cadmium	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60025

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for cadmium is 5 ug/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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71322, Cadmium	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60024

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cadmium is 4.98 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84383	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Carbaryl
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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 16 available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 the 16 available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD, and this sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84383, Carbaryl	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60026

Pollutant:

Carbaryl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 USEPA recommended water quality criterion for freshwater aquatic life for carbaryl is 2.1 µg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87662	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Carbofuran
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for MUN. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for MUN. 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:	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:	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 87662, Carbofuran	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60027

Pollutant:

Carbofuran

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 freshwater criterion maximum concentration for carbofuran is 0.5 µg/L (DFG 92-3, 1992).

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Carbofuran to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87662, Carbofuran	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60028

Pollutant:

Carbofuran

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Carbofuran is 18 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87664	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Chlordane
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87664, Chlordane	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60029

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 1 sample collected exceeded the criteria for chlordane concentration (Sum of trans-Chlordane, cis-Chlordane, cis-Nonachlor, trans-Nonachlor, and Oxychlordane).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affects beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).

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 Probable Effect Concentration for Chlordane in freshwater sediments is 17.6 ug/kg(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:

Data were collected at the following station 535MER007 (Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	72733	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence (one based on 13 water sample and the other based on a single sediment sample) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 13 water samples exceeded the water quality objective. The sediment sample results were not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 13 water samples exceeded the water quality criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. The results of a single sediment sample could not be assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by 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:	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:	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 72733, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60030

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for chlorpyrifos, 0.177 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 1.77 ug/g OC). The LC50 (1.77 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for chlorpyrifos from Amweg and Weston (2007).

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72733, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

21648

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirteen water samples were collected from Bear Creek from March 2005 through September 2006, representing thirteen calculated 4-day average concentrations and thirteen 1-hour average concentrations. One of the thirteen calculated 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average criterion of 0.015 ug/L. One of the thirteen 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average 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

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.

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 chlorpyrifos criteria for freshwater aquatic life protection: 0.015 ug/L 4-day average concentration, and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average 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 Bear Creek at Kibby Road.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly from March 2005 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	84482	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Chromium
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. The single sediment sample result exceeds the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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. The single sediment sample result does not exceed the evaluation guidelines, and the sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	.After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84482, Chromium	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60031

Pollutant:

Chromium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that the sample result exceeds the evaluation guideline value for Chromium.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for chromium is 111 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	88242	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Chrysene (C1-C4)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88242, Chrysene (C1-C4)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60032

Pollutant:

Chrysene (C1-C4)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Chrysene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Chrysene is 1,290 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	74029	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Copper
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under 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 38 water sample results (sum of data from two lines of evidence) exceed the water quality objectives for the WARM and MUN beneficial uses. A single sediment sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 38 water sample results (sum of data from two lines of evidence) exceed the California Toxics Rule 4-day average criteria for dissolved Copper and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. A single sediment sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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:	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:	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 74029, Copper	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60033

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Copper.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for copper is 149 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74029, Copper	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60034

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California secondary maximum contaminant level for copper is 1.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR title 22 section 64449.

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74029, Copper	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7925

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 22 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Copper.

Data Reference:

San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule 4-day average criteria for dissolved Copper.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from October 2000 to June 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88187	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Cyanazine
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88187, Cyanazine	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60035

Pollutant:

Cyanazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 EC50 for Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom) for cyanazine is 4.8 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84572	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Cyfluthrin
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eight water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) were above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The single sediment sample was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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 water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) were above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84572, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60036

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Cyfluthrin, total. Eight samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Cyfluthrin, 0.00005 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Water Quality Criteria Report for Cyfluthrin, March 2010).

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/18/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84572, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60037

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for cyfluthrin, 0.11 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 1.1 ug/g OC). The LC50 (1.1 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for cyfluthrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84615	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Cyhalothrin, Lambda
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eight of the water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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 the water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84615, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60039

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for lambda-cyhalothrin, 0.044 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.44 ug/g OC). The LC50 (0.44 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for lambda-cyhalothrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84615, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60038

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Cyhalothrin, lambda. Eight samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Cyhalothrin, 0.0005 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/18/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84616	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Cypermethrin
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eight of the water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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 the water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 5. The total sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 6. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84616, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60041

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Cypermethrin, total. Eight samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Cypermethrin, 0.0002 ug/L, or the 1-hour average concentration, 0.001 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/18/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84616, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60042

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for cypermethrin, 0.03 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.3 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for cypermethrin from Maund et al. (2002).

Guideline Reference:

Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87415	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for COLD. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87415, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60043

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (28.0 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDD (o,p' + p,p') is 28.0 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87415, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

78756

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The method detection limit DDD for all 16 samples collected from Bear Creek are greater than the criterion; therefore, the could not be assessed with the accuracy required by the Listing Policy

Data Reference:

Data for Metals and Nutrients for the City of Anderson, 2006-2008.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007) 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), for 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) with a limit of 0.00083 ug/L for DDD

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:

Sixteen water samples were collected from Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) at one station [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

The 16 samples were collected nearly monthly between 2/12/2007 and 9/30/2008

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data was collected under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84665	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. All of the 16 water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The single sediment sample result exceeded the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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. All 16 water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The single sediment sample result exceeded the evaluation guideline. 5. The total sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84665, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60044

Pollutant:

DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (31.3 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDE is 31.3 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84665, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

78859

Pollutant:

DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The method detection limits for DDE for all 16 samples collected from Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) are greater than the criterion; therefore, they could not be assessed with the accuracy required by the Listing Policy

Data Reference:

Data for Metals and Nutrients for the City of Anderson, 2006-2008.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Sixteen water samples were collected from Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) at one station [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

The 16 samples were collected nearly monthly between 2/12/2007 and 9/30/2008

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data was collected under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	87480	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of one sample exceed the criteria for COLD. One of one sample exceed the criteria for MUN. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. One of one sample exceed the criteria for COLD. One of one sample exceed the criteria for MUN. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87480, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60053

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDT(p,p). Fifteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The criterion for total DDT to protect human health from consumption of water and organisms is 0.00059 ug/L (California Toxics Rule).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87480, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60052

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (62.9 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDT is 62.9 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87480, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60054

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDT(p,p). Fifteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The DDT criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.001 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84666	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Deltamethrin
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The total sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84666, Deltamethrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60055

Pollutant:

Deltamethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for deltamethrin, 0.079 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.79 ug/g OC). The LC50 (0.79 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for deltamethrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84709	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 16 water sample results exceeded the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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 16 water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84709, Diazinon	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60056

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (5 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (1.1 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for diazinon, 1.1 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 11 ug/g OC). The LC50 (11 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for diazinon (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84709, Diazinon	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60069

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 freshwater chronic criterion value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87830	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Dicofol
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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:	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:	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 87830, Dicofol	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60070

Pollutant:

Dicofol

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Dicofol, 5.9 ug/L, is the maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) for Oncorhyncus mykiss (Rainbow trout); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87532	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Dieldrin
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for MUN. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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:	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:	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 87532, Dieldrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60072

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Sixteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The criterion for Dieldrin to protect human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.00014 ug/L (California Toxics Rule).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87532, Dieldrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60073

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Dieldrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87532, Dieldrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60071

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (61.8 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for dieldrin is 61.8 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAMP (2002) was used for data before Septemper 1, 2008 and SWAMP QAPP (2008) was thereafter.

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)

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	99851	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Dimethoate
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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 16 available water sample results exceeded the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 16 water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. The sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 99851, Dimethoate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60084

Pollutant:

Dimethoate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for dimethoate, 4.3 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 43 ug/L) for Pteronarcys californica (Stonefly); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87831	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Disulfoton
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87831, Disulfoton	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60085

Pollutant:

Disulfoton

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Disulfoton. Sixteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 USEPA National Recommended Water Quality criterion for disulfoton in freshwater (0.05 ug/L) is an aquatic life maximum (instantaneous) level.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84710	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Diuron
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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 16 available water sample results exceeded the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 16 water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. The sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84710, Diuron	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

79553

Pollutant:

Diuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Diuron, 1.3 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:105-141.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	87534	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for MUN. Also, zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for MUN. 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:	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:	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 87534, Endrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60088

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Endrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.036 ug/L. (California Toxics Rule, 2000)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87534, Endrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60102

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Endrin criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.76 ug/L. (California Toxics Rule, 2000)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87534, Endrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60087

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (207 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for endrin is 207 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAMP (2002) was used for data before Septemper 1, 2008 and SWAMP QAPP (2008) was thereafter.

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)

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84757	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the eight available water sample results exceeded the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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 eight water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84757, Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60104

Pollutant:

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for fenvalerate, 0.113 ug/L, is one-tenth the LC50 (1.13 ug/L) for Pimephales promelas (Fathead minnow); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/18/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84757, Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60105

Pollutant:

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (1 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (0.15 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate, 0.15 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 1.5 ug/g OC). The LC50 (1.5 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84758	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Fenpropathrin
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84758, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60112

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for fenpropathrin, 0.1 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; one ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for fenpropathrin (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87881	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Fluoranthene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87881, Fluoranthene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60113

Pollutant:

Fluoranthene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Fluoranthene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Fluoranthene is 2,230 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87882	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Fluorene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87882, Fluorene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60114

Pollutant:

Fluorene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Fluorene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for fluorene is 536 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84759	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Glyphosate
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 16 available water sample results exceeded either the water quality objective for the MUN beneficial use or the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 16 available water sample results exceed the water quality objective for MUN or the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. The sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84759, Glyphosate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60116

Pollutant:

Glyphosate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Glyphosate is 700 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84759, Glyphosate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60115

Pollutant:

Glyphosate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for glyphosate, 5,500 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 55,000 ug/L) for Chironimus plumosus (Midge). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	79273	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from two lines of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 22 available water sample concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Warm Freshwater Habitat and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 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 0 of the 22 available water sample concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Warm Freshwater Habitat and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. The single sediment sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the WARM beneficial use,and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using 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:	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:	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 79273, Lead	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7927

Pollutant:

Lead

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:

Zero of the 22 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved lead

Data Reference:

San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Dissolved lead levels should not exceed the calculated CTR value based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average, dissolved)=(EXP(1.273*LN(hardness)-1.46))*(1.46203-(LN(hardness)*0.145712))

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between October 26, 2000 to November 21, 2002

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79273, Lead	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60125

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Lead.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins)

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for lead is 128 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87883	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87883, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60126

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment sample was collected and analyzed for the SWAMP.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Lindane (gamma-HCH) is 4.99 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87884	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Linuron
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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:	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:	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 87884, Linuron	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60127

Pollutant:

Linuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Linuro, 13.7 ug/L, is the EC50 for Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	72686	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Low Dissolved Oxygen
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the 88 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 88 samples exceeded the objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 72686, Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

25326

Pollutant:

Low Dissolved Oxygen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sixteen samples were taken from Bear Creek between 2005 and 2006. Two of the sixteen 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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen objective for the SPWN (Fish Spawning benefial use) is 7mg/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 Bear Creek at Kibby Road in Merced County.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly or bimonthly between March 2005 and September 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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 72686, Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

25328

Pollutant:

Low Dissolved Oxygen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fifty-one samples were taken from Bear Creek between 2001 and 2005. One of the 51 samples fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen objective for the SPWN (Fish Spawning benefial use) is 7mg/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 Bear Creek at Crane Road in Merced County.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly or bimonthly between June 2001 and November 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Good. Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California¿s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB, 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72686, Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59999

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data to determine beneficial use support: None of 21 sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd-535XBCAKR].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected at various intervals, from 2/12/2007 to 7/20/2010. Four pairs of samples were collected within 7-day periods; the sample results for each pair were averaged.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	99852	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Malathion
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. None of the 16 available water sample results were used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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 the 16 available water sample results were used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 99852, Malathion	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60128

Pollutant:

Malathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Malathion. Sixteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Malathion, 0.028 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84809	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Mercury
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. The single sediment sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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. The single sediment sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 4. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84809, Mercury	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60129

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Mercury.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for mercury is 1.06 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87933	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Methidathion
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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:	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:	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 87933, Methidathion	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59954

Pollutant:

Methidathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Methidathion, 0.86 ug/L, is the maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) for Daphina magna (Water flea); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87934	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Methiocarb
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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:	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:	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 87934, Methiocarb	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59955

Pollutant:

Methiocarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for methiocarb, 43.6 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 436 ug/L) for Oncorhyncus mykiss (Rainbow trout); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84855	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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 16 water sample results exceeded the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 16 water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 4. The sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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:	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. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84855, Methomyl	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59956

Pollutant:

Methomyl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The criteria continuous concentration for Methomyl in the San Joaquin River system is 0.5 ug/L (4-day average). (CDFG, 1996)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87639	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Methoxychlor
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for MUN. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for MUN. 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:	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:	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 87639, Methoxychlor	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59967

Pollutant:

Methoxychlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87639, Methoxychlor	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59957

Pollutant:

Methoxychlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Methoxychlor, 30 ug/L, is incorporated by reference into the (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87935	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Methyl Parathion
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of zero samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87935, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59968

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Methyl. Sixteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 California Department of Fish and Game instantaneous aquatic life criterion for Methyl Parathion is 0.08 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Environmental Services Division. Administrative Report 92-1

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87935, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59969

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for methyl parathion, 0.6 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 6 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for methyl parathion (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87936	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Molinate
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for MUN. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for COLD. Zero of 16 samples exceed the criteria for MUN. 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:	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:	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 87936, Molinate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59970

Pollutant:

Molinate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Molinate, 600 ug/L, the maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87936, Molinate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59983

Pollutant:

Molinate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Molinate is 20 ug/L .

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87989	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Naphthalene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of one sample exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87989, Naphthalene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59984

Pollutant:

Naphthalene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Naphthalene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for naphthalene is 561 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	79319	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Nickel
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from three lines of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that none of 22 available water sample results exceeded the California Toxics Rule for the WARM beneficial use, none of 16 samples exceeded the water quality objective for the MUN beneficial use, a single sediment sample exceeds the evaluation guideline for the WARM beneficial use, and these results do not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 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 22 available water sample results exceeded the California Toxics Rule for WARM. 4. None of another 16 samples exceeded the water quality objective for the MUN beneficial use. 5. A single sediment sample exceeds the evaluation guideline for the WARM beneficial use 6. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 79319, Nickel	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59986

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nickel is 0.1 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79319, Nickel	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7931

Pollutant:

Nickel

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:

Zero of the 22 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved nickel

Data Reference:

San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Dissolved nickel levels should not exceed the calculated CTR limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average, dissolved)=(EXP(0.846*LN(hardness)+2.255))*(0.998)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between October 26, 2000, to November 21, 2002

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79319, Nickel	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59985

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that the sample result exceeds the evaluation guideline value for Nickel.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for nickel is 48.6 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	70939	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of 11 available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3) for the WARM beneficial use. None of 16 other available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for Nitrogen, Nitrate for the MUN beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 11 available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3) for WARM, none of 16 other available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for Nitrogen, Nitrate for MUN, and this sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 70939, Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59987

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nitrate (NO3 as N) is 10.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70939, Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7932

Pollutant:

Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)

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:

Zero of the 11 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nitrate-N.

Data Reference:

San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Nitrate-N levels should not to exceed 100 mg/L (USEPA National Ambient Water Quality Objective)

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Oct 25 2001

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	91566	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Nitrogen, Nitrate
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of 16 samples exceed the California Primary MCL for MUN. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the California Primary MCL for MUN 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:	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:	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 91566, Nitrogen, Nitrate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59987

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nitrate (NO3 as N) is 10.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	94289	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Nitrogen, Nitrite
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the California Primary MCL for MUN. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the California Primary MCL for MUN 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:	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:	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 94289, Nitrogen, Nitrite	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59988

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrite

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nitrite (as N) is 1 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87757	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Oxamyl (Vydate)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of the sixteen 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the 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.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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:	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 87757, Oxamyl (Vydate)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

79554

Pollutant:

Oxamyl (Vydate)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Oxamyl incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 50 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins).

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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	87759	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under 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. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87759, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60000

Pollutant:

PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Pyrene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for PAH's is 22,800 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald, 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	82293	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. The single sample result does not exceed the evaluation guideline. 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 CWA 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. The single sample result does not exceed the evaluation guidelines, and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 82293, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60002

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 1 sample collected for Total PCBs exceeded the evaluation guideline.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affects beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).

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:

In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total PCB is 676 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data were collected at the following station 535MER007 (Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	99894	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Paraquat
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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 16 available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. 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 CWA 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 16 available water sample results exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use, and this sample size is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is sufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 99894, Paraquat	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60001

Pollutant:

Paraquat

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline for Paraquat, 1,200 ug/L, is an EC50 for Daphnia sp. (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	84899	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Permethrin, 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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. All eight water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 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 CWA 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. All eight water sample results were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 4. The single sediment sample result was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. 5. The total sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 6. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84899, Permethrin, total	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60003

Pollutant:

Permethrin, total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Permethrin, Total. Eight samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Permethrin, 0.0002 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/18/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84899, Permethrin, total	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60014

Pollutant:

Permethrin, total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (4 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (0.89 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 evaluation guideline value for permethrin, 0.89 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 8.9 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for permethrin (Amweg et al. 2005).

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87760	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Phenanthrene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under 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. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87760, Phenanthrene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60015

Pollutant:

Phenanthrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Phenanthrene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Phenanthrene is 1,170 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87809	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Phorate
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation 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.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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:	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 87809, Phorate	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60016

Pollutant:

Phorate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for phorate, 0.2 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 2.0 ug/L) for Lepomis macrochirus (Bluegill sunfish). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87810	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Phosmet
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation 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.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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:	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 87810, Phosmet	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60017

Pollutant:

Phosmet

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Phosmet, 5.6 ug/L, is the EC50 for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87811	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Pyrene
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under 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. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87811, Pyrene	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59971

Pollutant:

Pyrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Pyrene.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Pyrene is 1,520 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	93692	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Selenium
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the twelve samples exceed the water quality criteria for MUN, and zero of the twelve samples exceed the water quality criteria for COLD. 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 CWA 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. Zero of the twelve samples exceed the water quality criteria for MUN, and zero of the twelve samples exceed the water quality criteria for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93692, Selenium	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59973

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93692, Selenium	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59972

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for selenium is 0.05 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	93379	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Simazine
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the water quality criteria for MUN, and zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the water quality criteria for MUN, and zero of sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD 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:	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:	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 93379, Simazine	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59975

Pollutant:

Simazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Simazine is 4 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93379, Simazine	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59974

Pollutant:

Simazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Simazine, 90 ug/L, is the EC50 for Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87865	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of the twenty-four 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the twenty-four samples exceed the 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.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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:	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 87865, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60086

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California secondary maximum contaminant levels for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), an upper level (1,600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2,200 uS/cm). The recommended level of 900 uS/cm was used as it is protective of all drinking water uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR title 22 section 64449.

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-7/20/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	99895	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Listing Policy. To determine the appropriate use support rating for COLD, an evaluation guideline identifying the optimal temperature range for rainbow trout for growth and completion of most life stages was used to interpret the narrative water quality objective for temperature. Section 6.1.5.2 of the Listing Policy states ¿¿samples should represent statistically or in a targeted manner the segment of the water body.¿ Water temperature data collected for this water body do not capture the spatial variability of temperatures experienced by aquatic life. Section 6.1.5.3 of the Listing Policy states ¿Samples should be representative of the critical timing that the pollutant is expected to impact the water body.¿ Water temperature data collected for this water body do not capture the temporal variability of temperatures experienced by aquatic life. Per Section 6.1.5.9 of the Listing Policy, ¿¿temperature monitoring data shall be compared to the temperature requirements of aquatic life living in the water segment.¿ Currently, the readily available data for water temperature in this segment are insufficient to determine whether growth and all life stages of rainbow trout are being supported. The monitoring program that generated the temperature data was not designed to evaluate attainment of temperature standards to support aquatic life. The surface water grab samples collected do not provide sufficient temporal and spatial representation of temperature conditions throughout the water body segment for fish exposure. 3. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 99895, Temperature, water	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59989

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Juoaquin River Basin Plans).

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:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California (1976)

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-7/20/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	87866	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Thiobencarb/Bolero
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the water quality objective for MUN, and zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the water quality objective for MUN, and zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD 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:	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:	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 87866, Thiobencarb/Bolero	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59990

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb/Bolero

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb, 1.4 ug/L, is a maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) calculated for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 87866, Thiobencarb/Bolero	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59991

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb/Bolero

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of Thiobencarb in excess of 1.0 µg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	71772	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under 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. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71772, Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

59992

Pollutant:

Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (572 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total DDTs (sum DDT + sum DDD + sum DDE) is 572 ug/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	87867	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the criteria. 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 CWA 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. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 87867, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

79552

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: At a minimum, water designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The secondary MCL for Total Dissolved Solids is 500 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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	70940	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

Pollutant:	Zinc
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from three lines of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on 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 22 available water sample results exceeded the water quality objective for the MUN beneficial use, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. None of 16 available water sample results exceeded the water quality objective for the WARM beneficial use, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. A single sediment sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for the WARM beneficial use, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 6. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 70940, Zinc	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

7934

Pollutant:

Zinc

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:

Zero of the 22 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR objective for Zinc.

Data Reference:

San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Dissolved Zinc levels should not exceed the calculated limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration=EXP((0.8473*LN(hardness))+0.884)*(0.978) (CTR)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Nov 21 2002

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70940, Zinc	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60007

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California secondary maximum contaminant level for zinc is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR title 22 section 64449.

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70940, Zinc	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

60006

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Zinc.

Data Reference:

Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for zinc is 459 mg/Kg dry weight (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:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road - 535MER007]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 7/23/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	72627	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Six of 102 samples exceed the water quality objective for WARM. Two of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for MUN. 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. Six of 102 samples exceeded the pH objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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:	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 72627, pH	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

79557

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-7/20/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72627, pH	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

25345

Pollutant:

pH (high)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 62 samples from October 2000 to November 2005.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,
raised above 8.5, or changed at any time more than 0.5 units from normal ambient pH.

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 at Bear Creek near Bert Crane Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred monthly and, occasionally, bimonthly from October 2000 to November 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board¿s Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California¿s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72627, pH	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

25346

Pollutant:

pH (high)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Irrigated Lands Program 2007 Monitoring Data Review.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,
raised above 8.5, or changed at any time more than 0.5 units from normal ambient pH.

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 at Bear Creek at Kibby Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred irregularly, at intervals ranging from weekly to quarterly, but mostly monthly, from March 2005 to September 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72627, pH	Region 5
Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties)

LOE ID:

79555

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in East San Joaquin, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

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:

Data for this line of evidence for Bear Creek (from Bear Valley to San Joaquin River, Mariposa and Merced Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Bear Creek @ Kibby Rd - 535XBCAKR]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/12/2007-7/20/2010.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):