| Water Body Name: | Chicken Ranch Slough |
| Water Body ID: | CAR5192100019980817094238 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
73286 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Pyrethroids |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | Phase 2 (Pyrethroids)Sacramento and San Joaquin Pesticides Basin Plan Amendment and TMDLs |
| TMDL Project Code: | 872 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 04/22/2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2 and 4.11 of the Listing Policy. Under 4.11 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of 4 sediment samples collected from Chicken Ranch Slough exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella azteca (an amphipod invertebrate species) survival compared to control, and this exceeds the narrative toxicity objective and the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. The Central Valley Pyrethroid Pesticides TMDL and Basin Plan Amendment was approved by USEPA in 2019. 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 21767 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of four sediment samples exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella aztec (an amphipod invertebrate) survival compared to control, and this violates the narrative toxicity objective. The two toxic sediment samples (and their mean mortality + standard deviation) were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 24 October 2004 (39+23.6) and on 10 March 2005 (33+19.1). The cause of the toxicity has been determined to be pyrethroids. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (CVRWQCB, 2007). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference of sediment 10-day toxicity compared to control, using Dunnett's test with Hyalella azteca (an invertebrate amphipod species) as the test species. Arcsin squareroot transformation was used when necessary to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Steel's test was used for comparison to control if these assumptions were not met after transformation. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Distribution and Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides in Agriculture-Dominated Water Bodies of California¿s Central Valley | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sacramento River Watershed Program from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way. Chicken Ranch Slough sampling locations reflect mixed commercial and residential land uses. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Sediment samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 31 August 2004, 24 October 2004, 10 March 2005, and 12 August 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2001b, 2002b, 2003b, 2006). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 30936 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pyrethroids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of four sediment samples exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella aztec (an amphipod invertebrate) survival compared to control, and this violates the narrative toxicity objective. Toxicity observations were associated with pyrethroid pesticides. LC50s for sediment-bound pyrethroids were used as toxicity threshold benchmarks in a Toxic Unit (TU) analysis normalized to organic carbon content. The TU analysis of Chicken Ranch Slough sediment samples demonstrated that the two toxic samples had pyrethroid pesticide concentrations that would be expected to be acutely toxic. Sediment samples collected from Chicken Ranch Slough had an average of 1.36 to 4.19 TUs of pyrethroid pesticides. Bifenthrin appears to play a dominant role in the toxicity observations, but was not the only pyrethroid found in the two toxic sediment samples. Other pyrethroids observed in the two toxic sediment samples from Chicken Ranch Slough included cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, and permethrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (CVRWQCB, 2007). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference of sediment 10-day toxicity compared to control, using Dunnett's test with Hyalella azteca (an invertebrate amphipod species) as the test species. Arcsin squareroot transformation was used when necessary to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Steel's test was used for comparison to control if these assumptions were not met after transformation.
LC50 values, based on 10-day exposure to Hyallela azteca of pyrethroids in sediment samples, were used to determine Toxic Unit (TUs) for pyrethroids in sediments. Urban creek sediment sample pyrethroid concentrations were compared the TUs to determine exceedances. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | Distribution and Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides in Agriculture-Dominated Water Bodies of California¿s Central Valley | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sacramento River Watershed Program from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way. Chicken Ranch Slough sampling locations reflect mixed commercial and residential land uses. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sediment samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 31 August 2004, 24 October 2004, 10 March 2005, and 12 August 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2001b, 2002b, 2003b, 2006). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
91513 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| TMDL Name: | Sacramento Area Urban Creeks TMDLs |
| TMDL Project Code: | 194 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 11/30/2004 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This water body segment and pollutant combination was considered for removal from CWA section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 and 4.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.11, a minimum of one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. No new data or information was available for assessment during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. There is sufficient justification for retaining it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA section 303(d) List because a USEPA-approved TMDL is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. The original listing of this water body and pollutant combination is identified by a placeholder line of evidence for a decision made prior to 2006; no data or information is provided. 4. One of the five calculated 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average criterion of 0.10 ug/L. One of five 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average criterion of 0.16 ug/L. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information described in the lines of evidence associated with this decision, the Regional Water Board determined that this water body and pollutant combination is still impaired and that it is being addressed by a USEPA-approved TMDL. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2653 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 21744 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Five water samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough between January 2005 and February 2007, representing five calculated 4-day average concentrations and five 1-hour average concentrations. One of the five calculated 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average criterion of 0.10 ug/L. One of five 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average criterion of 0.16 ug/L. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Sacramento River Watershed Program Annual Reports for 1999-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003, and 2003-2004; and BDAT data 1998-2003 | ||||
| Evaluation of Additional Pesticide Monitoring Data - 2007 Update | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment diazinon criteria for freshwater aquatic life protection: 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Water samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Hurley Way. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (e.g. monthly) from January 2005 to February 2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2002-0206) requirements. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
72719 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | The decision has not changed. No additional data and information were available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle indicating that standards are being met.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of 4 sediment samples collected from Chicken Ranch Slough exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella azteca (an amphipod invertebrate species) survival compared to control, and this exceeds the narrative toxicity objective and the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Sediment-bound pyrethroid pesticide concentrations were used to calculate toxic units (TUs) of multiple pyrethroid pesticides observed in sediments. Pyrethroid TU analyses correlated with the distribution and magnitude of the observed toxicity. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | The decision has not changed; no additional data and information were available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle indicating that standards are being met. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 21767 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of four sediment samples exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella aztec (an amphipod invertebrate) survival compared to control, and this violates the narrative toxicity objective. The two toxic sediment samples (and their mean mortality + standard deviation) were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 24 October 2004 (39+23.6) and on 10 March 2005 (33+19.1). The cause of the toxicity has been determined to be pyrethroids. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (CVRWQCB, 2007). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference of sediment 10-day toxicity compared to control, using Dunnett's test with Hyalella azteca (an invertebrate amphipod species) as the test species. Arcsin squareroot transformation was used when necessary to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Steel's test was used for comparison to control if these assumptions were not met after transformation. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Distribution and Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides in Agriculture-Dominated Water Bodies of California¿s Central Valley | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sacramento River Watershed Program from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way. Chicken Ranch Slough sampling locations reflect mixed commercial and residential land uses. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Sediment samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 31 August 2004, 24 October 2004, 10 March 2005, and 12 August 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2001b, 2002b, 2003b, 2006). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
92059 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
| 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: | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| TMDL Name: | Sacramento Area Urban Creeks TMDLs |
| TMDL Project Code: | 194 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 11/30/2004 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This water body segment and pollutant combination was considered for removal from CWA section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 and 4.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.11, a minimum of one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. No new data or information was available for assessment during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA section 303(d) List because a USEPA-approved TMDL is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. The original listing of this water body and pollutant combination is identified by a placeholder line of evidence for a decision made prior to 2006; no data or information is provided. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information described in the lines of evidence associated with this decision, the Regional Water Board determined that this water body and pollutant combination is still impaired and that it is being addressed by a USEPA-approved TMDL. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2652 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||