| Water Body Name: | Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
| Water Body ID: | CAR2061000020160627048321 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
97124 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Acenaphthene |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of eleven samples exceed the OEHHA 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 eleven samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94587 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Acenaphthene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River - Mare Island Strait - to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Acenaphthene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Acenaphthene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 2,700 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 Napa River - Mare Island Strait - was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/13/1996-7/17/2000. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
99821 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of eighteen samples exceed the 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 eighteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94585 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Anthracene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 18 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Anthracene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Anthracene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 110,000 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97241 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of twenty-five samples exceed the 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94561 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 13 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the thirteen exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. If a dry weight result did not have a corresponding moisture result for conversion to wet weight, the sample was not included in the assessment. The fraction of total arsenic in inorganic form was taken to be 0.115%, which was the maximum fraction of inorganic arsenic found in shellfish tissue from SF Bay. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| Contaminant Concentrations in Fish from San Francisco Bay, 2000 | |||||
| Calculating Fraction of Inorganic Arsenic in SF Bay Fish and Shellfish | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Advisory Tissue Level for arsenic in shellfish tissue is 0.52 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in ten thousand. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2004)
Advisory Tissue Levels (ATLs), while still conferring no significant health risk to individuals consuming sport fish in the quantities shown over a lifetime, were developed with the recognition that there are unique health benefits associated with fish consumption and that the advisory process should be expanded beyond a simple risk paradigm in order to best promote the overall health of the fish consumer. ATLs provide a number of recommended fish servings that correspond to the range of contaminant concentrations found in fish and are used to provide consumption advice to prevent consumers from being exposed to more than the average daily reference dose for noncarcinogens or to a risk level greater than 1x10-4 for carcinogens (not more than one additional cancer case in a population of 10,000 people consuming fish at the given consumption rate over a lifetime). ATLs are designed to encourage consumption of fish that can be eaten in quantities likely to provide significant health benefits, while discouraging consumption of fish that, because of contaminant concentrations, should not be eaten or cannot be eaten in amounts recommended for improving overall health (eight ounces total, prior to cooking, per week). ATLs are one of the criteria that will be used by OEHHA for issuing fish consumption guidelines. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94584 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Arsenic criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.14 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95212 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. The fraction of total arsenic in inorganic form was taken to be 3.2%, which was the maximum fraction of inorganic arsenic found in shark tissue from SF Bay data. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| Calculating Fraction of Inorganic Arsenic in SF Bay Fish and Shellfish | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Advisory Tissue Level for arsenic in fish tissue is 0.34 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in ten thousand. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2004).
Advisory Tissue Levels (ATLs), while still conferring no significant health risk to individuals consuming sport fish in the quantities shown over a lifetime, were developed with the recognition that there are unique health benefits associated with fish consumption and that the advisory process should be expanded beyond a simple risk paradigm in order to best promote the overall health of the fish consumer. ATLs provide a number of recommended fish servings that correspond to the range of contaminant concentrations found in fish and are used to provide consumption advice to prevent consumers from being exposed to more than the average daily reference dose for noncarcinogens or to a risk level greater than 1x10-4 for carcinogens (not more than one additional cancer case in a population of 10,000 people consuming fish at the given consumption rate over a lifetime). ATLs are designed to encourage consumption of fish that can be eaten in quantities likely to provide significant health benefits, while discouraging consumption of fish that, because of contaminant concentrations, should not be eaten or cannot be eaten in amounts recommended for improving overall health (eight ounces total, prior to cooking, per week). ATLs are one of the criteria that will be used by OEHHA for issuing fish consumption guidelines. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97355 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of twenty samples exceed the 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 twenty samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94583 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 20 samples exceed the criterion for Indeno(1, 2, 3-C, D)Pyrene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Benzo(a)Pyrene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.049 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97356 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of fifteen samples exceed the OEHHA 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 fifteen samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95141 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for cadmium. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for cadmium in fish tissue is 2.2 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94559 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 15 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. If a dry weight result did not have a corresponding moisture result for conversion to wet weight, the sample was not included in the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for cadmium in shellfish tissue is 3.3 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and during fall 2000 and 2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97555 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of four samples exceed the OEHHA 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 four samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95148 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for chlorpyrifos. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for chlorpyrifos in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97556 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of twenty-one samples exceed the 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 twenty-one samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94579 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for Chrysene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Chrysene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.049 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97610 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94577 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the SSO value of 6 ug/L for dissolved copper. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in California Marinas, 2006. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. Table 3.3A lists a site specific objective (SSO) for criteria continuous concentration of dissolved copper. The SSO for dissolved copper in this portion of the San Francisco Bay Delta is 6.0 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | A total of four separate grab samples were collected from outside the Vallejo Marina basin (Sites 5, 6, 7, & 8), these sites were averaged per sample event. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on three separate sampling events during the dry season (July - October) in 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Samples were collected during the dry season only. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with a Quality Assurance Project Plan that was prepared per State Water Resources Control Board Agreement No. 05-218-250 California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Sacramento, CA. (Available online at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/protocols/qapp_study236.pdf) | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94578 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Copper. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | According to table 3-3A, the Copper site-specific objective for Napa River is 6 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97611 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Cyanide |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 three samples exceed the 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 three samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94568 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyanide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Cyanide. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The cyanide criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 220,000 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-9/15/1993. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94569 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyanide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Cyanide. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | According to table 3-3C, the Cyanide site-specific objective for Napa River is 2.9 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-9/15/1993. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97607 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of four samples exceed the OEHHA 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 four samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94572 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The 1 sample did not exceed the guideline. The composite sample was comprised of Crassostrea gigas. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in shellfish tissue is 20,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected on 9/6/2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95131 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for endosulfan. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in fish tissue is 13,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97608 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate |
| 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 nineteen samples exceed the 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 nineteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94566 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan Sulfate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Endosulfan Sulfate criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 240 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/27/1994-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
100334 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 seventeen samples exceed the 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 seventeen samples exceed the 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94571 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 16 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in shellfish tissue is 1,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95231 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for endrin. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94565 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 17 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Endrin criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.81ug/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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/23/1994-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97609 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of twenty-one samples exceed the 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 twenty-one samples exceed the 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94564 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for Fluoranthene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Fluoranthene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 370 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97664 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of twelve samples exceed the 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 twelve samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94563 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fluorene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceed the criterion for Fluorene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Fluorene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 14,000 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/13/1996-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97665 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 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 sixteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94562 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Heptachlor criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00021 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/27/1994-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97666 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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. One of nineteen samples exceed the 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. One of nineteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94570 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 12 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Four samples 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. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in shellfish tissue is 1.4 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1999) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95082 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in fish tissue is 0.93 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1999) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94560 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor Epoxide. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Heptachlor Epoxide criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00011 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/8/1994-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97667 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB |
| 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 twenty samples exceed the 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 twenty samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94558 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 20 samples exceed the criterion for Hexachlorobenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Hexachlorobenzene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00077 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94556 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 16 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in shellfish tissue is 4.3 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95078 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for hexachlorobenzene. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in fish tissue is 2.8 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
100335 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the 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 sixteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94554 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 16 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for lindane in shellfish tissue is 7.1 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97724 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Manganese |
| 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 four samples exceed the 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 four samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Manganese | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Manganese. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Manganese criteria for the protection of human health from the consumption of organisms only is 100 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Lead criteria for the protection of human health from fish consumption only is 100 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/8/2000-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97725 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Mirex |
| 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 nineteen samples exceed the 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 nineteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95225 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex. Four samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in fish tissue is 0.28 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1992) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94552 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 3 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Thirteen samples 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. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in shellfish tissue is 0.43 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1992) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94548 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| 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. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Mirex criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.000097 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/27/1994-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97726 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94595 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Nickel criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 4.6 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97727 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 twelve samples exceed the 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. 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 twelve samples exceed the objective 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 26 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94594 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 12 minimum samples of Dissolved Oxygen concentrations had no exceedences. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in California Marinas, 2006. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen content of bays/estuaries downstream of the Carquinez Bridge must be above 5 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the following stations: Vallejo Municipal Marina 5.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 5.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 5.3 Vallejo Municipal Marina 6.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 6.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 6.3 Vallejo Municipal Marina 7.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 7.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 7.3 Vallejo Municipal Marina 8.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 8.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 8.3 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 8/7/2006 9/5/2006 10/3/2006 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with a Quality Assurance Project Plan that was prepared per State Water Resources Control Board Agreement No. 05-218-250 California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Sacramento, CA. (Available online at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/protocols/qapp_study236.pdf) | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97780 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification in favor of 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 sixteen samples exceed the OEHHA guideline and this number does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. There is not a fish consumption advisory in effect for this waterbody. 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94581 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 16 samples exceeded the guideline. Composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas or Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Laboratory replicates were averaged. PAH, Total is calculated as a potency weighted concentration with respect to benzo(a)pyrene and was calculated based on the following analytes: Dibenz(a,h)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benz(a)anthracene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, Anthracene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Chrysene, Acenaphthene, Acenaphthylene, Fluoranthene, Fluorene, Phenanthrene, and Pyrene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Advisory Tissue Level for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in shellfish tissue is 110 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in ten thousand. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)
Advisory Tissue Levels (ATLs), while still conferring no significant health risk to individuals consuming sport fish in the quantities shown over a lifetime, were developed with the recognition that there are unique health benefits associated with fish consumption and that the advisory process should be expanded beyond a simple risk paradigm in order to best promote the overall health of the fish consumer. ATLs provide a number of recommended fish servings that correspond to the range of contaminant concentrations found in fish and are used to provide consumption advice to prevent consumers from being exposed to more than the average daily reference dose for noncarcinogens or to a risk level greater than 1x10-4 for carcinogens (not more than one additional cancer case in a population of 10,000 people consuming fish at the given consumption rate over a lifetime). ATLs are designed to encourage consumption of fish that can be eaten in quantities likely to provide significant health benefits, while discouraging consumption of fish that, because of contaminant concentrations, should not be eaten or cannot be eaten in amounts recommended for improving overall health (eight ounces total, prior to cooking, per week). ATLs are one of the criteria that will be used by OEHHA for issuing fish consumption guidelines. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95066 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for polyaromatic hydrocarbons. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in fish tissue is 0.7 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97093 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 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 nineteen samples exceed the 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 nineteen samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94592 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Pyrene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Pyrene criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 11,000 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97094 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of fifteen samples exceed the OEHHA 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 fifteen samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94555 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 15 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. If a dry weight result did not have a corresponding moisture result for conversion to wet weight, the sample was not included in the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for selenium in shellfish tissue is 11 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day. A background dietary consumption rate of 0.114 mg/day is applied for this micronutrient. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and fall of years 2001 and 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95097 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for selenium. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for selenium in fish tissue is 7.4 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A background dietary consumption rate of 0.114 mg/day is applied for this micronutrient. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
100333 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of zero samples exceed the OEHHA 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 zero samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94551 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The one sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. The composite sample was comprised of Crassostrea gigas. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for toxaphene in shellfish tissue is 6.5 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected on 9/6/2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95120 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for toxaphene. Four samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for toxaphene in fish tissue is 4.3 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
100082 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eleven of sixteen sediment toxicity samples exceed the evaluation guideline. One of ten water column toxicity samples exceed the evaluation guideline Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. As explained in findings 3 and 4, the sediment toxicity data used do not satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. The Regional Board identified concerns about evaluating sediment quality based solely on toxicity data without consideration of sediment chemistry and benthic community condition; all three lines of evidence are referred to as the sediment quality triad. While the State has sediment quality objectives that incorporate all three lines of evidence (sediment chemistry, toxicity and benthic community condition), and these data exist for this waterbody, they could not be considered at this time because they were not available during the solicitation period. SQO data will be considered in future listing cycles. See also finding 8 below. 4 The Regional Board and general public identified concerns about the quality of toxicity data for which the amphipod Eohaustorius estuarius was the test organism because peer-reviewed scientific literature has revealed that this test organism can be impacted by the presence of naturally occurring clay in the sample, which is common in many Bay sediments. 5. Eleven of sixteen sediment toxicity samples exceed the guideline and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, but these data are not considered sufficient information on which to base a defensible listing determination for toxicity as described in findings 3 and 4. 6. One of ten samples exceed the water column toxicity 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. 7. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 8. The Listing Policy requires listing for toxicity only if the toxicity is associated with a pollutant, but the Policy provides the Regional Boards the option to list in circumstances in which the toxicity is not associated with a pollutant. Based on the data quantity and quality concerns summarized in findings 3 and 4, the Regional Board does not recommend listing this waterbody for toxicity. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95814 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Twelve of the 15 samples exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided).
The following test organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Eohaustorius estuarius (mean % survival),1993-2001; Mytilus edulis (mean % normal alive), 1993-95 1997; Mytilus galloprovincialis (mean % normal alive), 1998-2001; and Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (mean % normal development), 1998. The following samples exhibited toxicity: Eohaustorius estuarius collected 1993-94,1996-2001; Mytilus edulis collected 1997; Mytilus galloprovincialis collected 1998; Strongylocentrotus purpuratus collected 1998. Additional results were not included in the assessment due to control results of less than 90 percent for test parameter. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| 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 2 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a significant reduction of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.01) and test organism survival is 80% or less than the control survival (at least 20% effect). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | SWAMP_Memo_Toxicity_Data_Intrepretation | ||||
| Methods for Assessing the Toxicity of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Estuarine and Marine Amphipods. June 1994. EPA 600/R-94/025 | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at site BD50. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected twice each year (winter and summer) from 1993 - 1999 and the summers of 2000 and 2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data collected after 1999 follows the San Francisco Estuary Institute 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95815 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the 10 samples exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided).
The following test organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Thalassiosira pseudonana (cell count), 1993; Crassostrea gigas (mean % normal development), 1993; Mytilus edulis (mean % normal development), 1993, 1996-97; and Americamysis bahia - formerly Mysidopsis bahia (mean % survival), 1994-97. The sample which exhibited toxicity was for Americamysis bahia collected February 1997. Additional results were not included in the assessment due to control results of less than 90 percent for test parameter. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| 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 2 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a significant reduction of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 80% or less than the control survival (at least 20% effect). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | SWAMP_Memo_Toxicity_Data_Intrepretation | ||||
| Method 1007.0: Mysid, Mysidopsis bahia, Survival, Growth, and Fecundity Test; Chronic Toxicity. Excerpt from: Short-Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Marine and Estuarine Organisms. 3rd edition EPA-821-R-02-014 | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at site BD50. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected twice each year (winter and summer) from 1993 - 1997. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | A Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was not available for this data. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97150 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Tributyltin TBT (Tributylstanne) |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of fifteen samples exceed the OEHHA 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 fifteen samples exceed the OEHHA 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94553 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Tributyltin TBT (Tributylstanne) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 15 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. If a dry weight result did not have a corresponding moisture result for conversion to wet weight, the sample was not included in the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for tributyltin in shellfish tissue is 1 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and fall of years 2000 and 2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97151 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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 twenty-five samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94590 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Zinc criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of fish only is 26000 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94589 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the CTR value of 81 ug/L for dissolved zinc in brackish water. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in California Marinas, 2006. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in saline water. The CTR value is 81 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | A total of four separate grab samples were collected from outside the Vallejo marina basin (Sites 5, 6, 7, & 8), these sites were averaged per sample event. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on three separate sampling events during the dry season (July - October) in 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Samples were collected during the dry season only. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with a Quality Assurance Project Plan that was prepared per State Water Resources Control Board Agreement No. 05-218-250 California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Sacramento, CA. (Available online at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/protocols/qapp_study236.pdf) | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97242 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 twenty-one samples exceed the 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 twenty-one samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94586 | ||||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River (Mare Island Strait) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Endosulfan I criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 240 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 Napa River (Mare Island Strait) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97357 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 twenty samples exceed the 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 twenty samples exceed the 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94582 | ||||
| Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 20 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan II. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Endosulfan II criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 240 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/8/1994-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
96914 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| 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 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. One of twelve samples exceed the 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. 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 twelve samples exceed the objective 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 26 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94576 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 12 minimums and maximums had 1 exceedence. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in California Marinas, 2006. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the following stations: Vallejo Municipal Marina 5.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 5.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 5.3 Vallejo Municipal Marina 6.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 6.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 6.3 Vallejo Municipal Marina 7.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 7.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 7.3 Vallejo Municipal Marina 8.1 Vallejo Municipal Marina 8.2 Vallejo Municipal Marina 8.3 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected once a month from August 2006 to October 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | NPDES quality assurance. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Study report on paint data collected in California Marinas. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97554 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2029 |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four of four samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Four of four samples exceed the OEHHA guideline and this number exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. There is not a fish consumption advisory in effect for this waterbody. 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 be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94575 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 15 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in shellfish tissue is 6.0 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95202 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for chlordane. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in fish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94580 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Chlordane, Total criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00059 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
97606 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2029 |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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. Seven of fourteen samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Seven of fourteen samples exceed the OEHHA guideline and this number exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. There is not a fish consumption advisory in effect for this waterbody. 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 be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95221 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for dieldrin. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in fish tissue is 0.32 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94573 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Seven of the 14 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. Two samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in shellfish tissue is 0.49 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94567 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Dieldrin criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00014 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
100283 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2029 |
| 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. Eleven of twenty-one samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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.Eleven of twenty-one samples exceed the guideline and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94574 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the 16 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in shellfish tissue is 23 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95191 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for DDT. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in fish tissue is 15 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94591 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 11 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The DDT, Total criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00059 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
100336 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | Mercury |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | San Francisco Bay Mercury |
| TMDL Project Code: | 6 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 02/12/2008 |
| 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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four of four samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Four of four samples exceed the OEHHA guideline and this number exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. There is not a fish consumption advisory in effect for this waterbody. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 6. The San Francisco Bay mercury TMDL was approved on March 12, 2008. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94557 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 13 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 13 samples exceeded the guideline. All composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas except for one that was comprised of Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. If a dry weight result did not have a corresponding moisture result for conversion to wet weight, the sample was not included in the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA 304(a) recommended water quality criterion for concentrations of methylmercury in shellfish tissue (wet weight) is 0.20 ppm. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; USEPA, 2001) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury. Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Office of Water. EPA-823-R-01-001. January 2001 | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury, methyl. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Mercury, methyl criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.051 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95175 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for mercury. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA 304(a) recommended water quality criterion for concentrations of methylmercury in fish tissue of trophic level 4 fish (150 - 500 mm; fillet wet weight) is 0.20 mg/kg. (USEPA, 2001) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury. Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Office of Water. EPA-823-R-01-001. January 2001 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
DECISION ID |
96913 |
Region 2 |
Napa River, Mare Island Strait |
||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | San Francisco Bay PCBs |
| TMDL Project Code: | 7 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/29/2010 |
| 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. Nineteen of twenty-one samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Nineteen of twenty-one samples exceed the guideline and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 5. The SF Bay PCBs TMDL was approved on 3/29/2010. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94593 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 21 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 19 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SFEI data for Napa River, Mare Island Strait to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 19 of 21 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Polychlorinated Biphenyls criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.00017 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 Napa River, Mare Island Strait was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Napa River - BD50] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 3/4/1993-8/7/2001. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95111 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Regional Monitoring Program data for the Mare Island Strait portion of the Napa River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for PCBs. No samples were discarded for being non-detect, unquantifiable or the reporting limit exceeding the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in fish tissue is 2.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one site in Mare Island Strait in the lower portion of the Napa River | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 1994. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances was used. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94588 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Shellfish surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Eleven of the 16 samples exceeded the guideline. Composite samples were comprised of Crassostrea gigas or Mytilus californianus. Data were reported on a dry weight basis and were converted to a wet weight basis by multiplying the dry-weight concentration by a factor of 1 minus the percentage of moisture content expressed as a decimal. Composite replicates were averaged. Laboratory replicates were averaged. Total PCB was assessed for as follows: PCB aroclors and congeners were summed separately and the sum that yielded the highest value was used for the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Regional Monitoring Program data, Feb. 1993-Sep. 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Francisco Bay Basin: Controllable water quality factors shall not cause a detrimental increase in concentrations of toxic substances found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Effects on aquatic organisms, wildlife, and human health will be considered. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in shellfish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
| Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the following station: BD50 - Napa River, Mare Island Strait | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were generally collected in spring and fall seasons from years 1993 - 1999 and then during fall season from years 2000 - 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | 1999 Quality Assurance Project Plan Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances | ||||