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

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDT is 62.9 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	75893	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. Two of the six samples exceed the fish tissue evaluation guideline for COMM. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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. Two of the six samples exceed the fish tissue evaluation guideline for COMM. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. This exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75893, Dieldrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69547

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The samples did not exceed the evaluation guideline value for Dieldrin.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for dieldrin is 61.8 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75893, Dieldrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26124

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish whole body

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two of the 6 composite fish tissue samples exceeded the Dieldrin Evaluation Guigeline for Dieldrin (OEHHA FCG of 0.46 ug/kg, and this exceeds narrative toxicity objective and the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
The exceedances were:
i) One composite sample of Channel Catfish from Colusa had 2.03 ug/kg of Dieldrin.
ii) One composite of Channel Catfish from Grimes had 3.74 ug/kg of Dieldrin.

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

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:

OEHHA 2008 Fish Contaminant Goals (FCG) are based on cancer risk assessments using an 8-Ounce/Week (prior to cooking) consumption rate of 32 g/day. The FCG used as a screening value for Dieldrin (with a cancer slope factor of 16 mg/kg/day) should be less than 0.46 ug/kg.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from various locations:
Channel Catfish and Sacramento Sucker at Colusa; Channel Catfish at Grimes; Sacramento Sucker at Hamilton City; Sacramento Sucker at Ord Bend; and Sacramento Sucker from Woodson Bridge.

Temporal Representation:

Fish were collected on the following dates: Colusa on 16 August 2005 (Channel catfish) and on 11 October 2005 (Sacramento Sucker); Grimes on 12 October 2005 (Channel Catfish); Hamilton City on 31 October 2005 (Sacramento Sucker); Ord Bend on 15 August 2005 (Sacramento Sucker); and Woodson Bridge on 15 August 2005 (Sacramento Sucker).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data Quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Sacramento River Watershed Program QAPP requirements.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plans prepared for Sacramento River Watershed Program


DECISION ID	69009	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Mercury
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. 222 of the 511 samples exceed the fish tissue criteria for COMM. Zero of the 2 samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Six LOEs were not used in the final listing decision due to the criterion change. The data in these LOEs were reassessed in new LOEs with the new criterion and these replacement LOEs are used in the final listing decision. These LOE replacements are as follows: 1) LOE 26292 was replaced with LOE 95577; 2) LOE 26348 was replaced with LOE 95578; 3) LOE 26352 was replaced with LOE 95579; 4) LOE 26350 was replaced with LOE 95580; 5) LOE 26346 was replaced with LOE 95581; and 6) LOE 22595 was replaced with LOE 95582. 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. 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. 222 of the 511 samples exceed the fish tissue criteria for COMM and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

2667

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

144

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-three out of 144 samples exceeded. All samples were collected in 2002 and 2006 (TSMP, 2002; CVRWQCB, 2006).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

OEHHA Screening Value of 0.3 ug/g for mercury (Brodberg & Pollock, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Fish Mercury Project, Year 2 Annual Report, Sport Fish Sampling and Analysis. Final Report. October 2007

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected on the Sacramento River between Red Bluff and Knights Landing. The area most impacted with exceedances is from Hamilton City to Knights Landing.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected in 2002 and 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

95581

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at four locations from this reach. A total of 52 out of 97 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health.

1) Sacramento River downstream from Colusa: 22 samples, 12 exceedences, range 0.03-1.04 ppm, 0.32 ppm average wet weight concentration;
2) Sacramento River at Knights Landing: 45 samples, 28 exceedences, range 0.04-1.00 ppm, 0.29 ppm average wet weight concentration;
3) Sacramento River near Hamiliton City: 15 samples, 8 exceedences, range 0.05-0.55 ppm, 0.24 ppm average wet weight concentration;
4) Sacramento River at Tisdale Boat Ramp: 15 samples, 4 exceedences, range 0.08-0.32 ppm, 0.17 ppm average wet weight concentration.

Fish tissue was analyzed from American Shad, Carp, Channel Catfish, Chinook Salmon, Hardhead, Largemouth Bass, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow and Sacramento Sucker. All 97 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA 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.

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:

Samples were collected at four locations from this reach of the Sacramento River: 5.6 miles downstream from Colusa near Moons Bend; 0.5 miles upstream of the Colusa Basin Drainage Canal input near Knights Landing; near Hamilton City and Jenny Lind Bend; and near the Tisdale Weir boat ramp.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during three sampling events on 5/9/2006, 7/25/2006 and from 8/2/2006 to 8/2/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent.. Quality Control for all of the elements described in section 6.1.4 of the Policy was conducted in accordance with the Laboratory QAPP developed by Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML, 2005). This data was also collected and analyzed in accordance with the CALFED Mercury Project QAPP (Puckett and van Buuren, 2000).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

95580

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One 5 fish composite sample of Hardhead was collected from this reach of the Sacramento River. The wet weight mercury concentration of this fish tissue sample was 0.13 ppm, which does not exceed the USEPA criterion. The composite sample was collected from fish with an average total length greater than 150 mm, which represents fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program: Freshwater Bioaccumulation Monitoring: TSM Program Data 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA 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.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one location from this reach of the Sacramento River downstream from Hamilton City near the confluence with Pine Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The fish sample was collected on 7/30/1981.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005). .

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent.. Quality Control for the fish sampling, tissue preparation, mercury analysis, and QA sample analysis portions of this study was conducted as described in the Toxic Substance Monitoring Report for 1981 (La Karo et al., 1982).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

95578

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled by SRWP for tissue analysis at two locations from this reach, at Colusa and downstream from Hamilton City. A total of 2 out of 9 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health.

1) Sacramento River at Colusa: The average wet weight mercury concentration in fish tissue was 0.20 ppm for the 5 samples collected at this location. The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species:
Carp- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.19 ppm, no exceedences;
Sacramento Pikeminnow- 2 composite samples, 0.15 and 0.30 ppm, 1 exceedence;
Sacramento Sucker- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.06 ppm, no exceedences;
and Striped Bass- 1 sample, 0.30 ppm, 1 exceedence.

2) Sacramento River downstream from Hamilton City: The average wet weight mercury concentration in fish tissue was 0.14 ppm for the 4 samples collected at this location. The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species:
Sacramento Pikeminnow- 2 composite samples, 0.22 and 0.29 ppm, 2 exceedences;
and Sacramento Sucker- 2 composite samples, both 0.03 ppm , no exceedences.

All 9 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA 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.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at two locations from this reach of the Sacramento River: near Colusa at the Bridge Street bridge; and downstream from Hamilton City near the confluence with Pine Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during two sampling events conducted during 1998 and 2000.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent.. Quality Control for all of the elements described in section 6.1.4 of the Policy was conducted in accordance with the Sacramento River Watershed Program QAPPs prepared by Larry Walker Associates (LWA, 1998; LWA, 2000).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plans prepared for Sacramento River Watershed Program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

95579

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at two locations from this reach, at Colusa and Knights Landing. A total of 3 out of 5 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health.

1) Sacramento River at Colusa: The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species:

Sacramento Pikeminnow- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.51 ppm, 1 exceedence;
Sacramento Sucker- one 6-fish composite sample, 0.08 ppm, no exceedences.

2) Sacramento River at Knights Landing: The average wet weight mercury concentration in fish tissue was 0.52 ppm for the 3 samples collected at this location. The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species:

Largemouth Bass- 2 composite samples, 0.60 and 0.76 ppm, 2 exceedences;
Sacramento Sucker- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.19 ppm, no exceedences.

All 3 composite samples were collected from fish with average total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Fish tissue was analyzed from Carp, Largemouth Bass, Rainbow Trout, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow, Sacramento Sucker and Smallmouth Bass. All 5 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program: Freshwater Bioaccumulation Monitoring Program 2001-2003. State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality. Unpublished Data

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA 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.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at two locations from this reach of the Sacramento River at Colusa and Knights Landing.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during two sampling events on 9/13/2002 and from 10/29/2002 to10/30/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent.. Quality Control for the fish sampling, tissue preparation, mercury analysis, and QA sample analysis portions of this study was conducted as described in the Environmental Chemistry Quality Assurance and Data Report for the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program, 2001-2002 (CDFG, 2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

22595

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

166

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at six locations from this reach. A total of 53 out of 166 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health.
1) Sacramento River near Butte City: 20 samples, 10 exceedences, range 0.04-0.75 ppm, 0.33 ppm average wet weight concentration; 2) Sacramento River downstream from Colusa: 46 samples, 19 exceedences, range 0.04-0.90 ppm, 0.33 ppm average wet weight concentration; 3) Sacramento River downstream from Grimes: 33 samples, 8 exceedences, range 0.03-0.96 ppm, 0.26 ppm average wet weight concentration; 4) Sacramento River at Hamiliton City: 27 samples, 4 exceedences, range 0.01-1.15 ppm, 0.21 ppm average wet weight concentration; 5) Sacramento River at Ord Bend: 20 samples, 5 exceedences, range 0.02-1.14 ppm, 0.23 ppm average wet weight concentration; 6) Sacramento River at Woodson Bridge: 20 samples, 7 exceedences, range 0.02-1.26 ppm, 0.35 ppm average wet weight concentration.
Fish tissue was analyzed from Channel Catfish, Hardhead, Largemouth Bass, Rainbow Trout, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow, Sacramento Sucker and Steelhead Trout. All 166 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

Fish Mercury Project, Year 1 Annual Report, Sport Fish Sampling and Analysis. Collaborating parties: San Francisco Estuary Institute, California Department of Fish and Game, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Final Technical Report. CBDA Project # ERP 02D-P6729. May 2007

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA Fish Tissue Residue Criterion for methylmercury in fish is 0.3 mg/kg (0.3 ppm) for the protection of human health. This is the concentration in fish tissue that should not be exceeded based on a total fish and shellfish consumption-weighted rate of 0.0175 kg fish/day. (USEPA, 2001)

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at six locations from this reach of the Sacramento River: near Butte City at the Hwy 162 bridge; 5 miles downstream from Colusa near Moons Bend; 1.5 miles downstream from Grimes near Eddys Ferry; near Hamilton City at the Hwy 32 bridge; near Ord Bend appoximately 0.2 miles downstream of the Ord Ferry Road bridge; and directly downstream from the Woodson Bridge crossing.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during three sampling events: from 8/15/2005 to 8/17/2005; from 10/11/2005 to 10/12/2005; and on 10/31/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26348

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled by SRWP for tissue analysis at two locations from this reach, at Colusa and downstream from Hamilton City. A total of 2 out of 9 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health. 1) Sacramento River at Colusa: The average wet weight mercury concentration in fish tissue was 0.20 ppm for the 5 samples collected at this location. The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species: Carp- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.19 ppm, no exceedences; Sacramento Pikeminnow- 2 composite samples, 0.15 and 0.30 ppm, 1 exceedence; Sacramento Sucker- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.06 ppm, no exceedences; and Striped Bass- 1 sample, 0.30 ppm, 1 exceedence. 2) Sacramento River downstream from Hamilton City: The average wet weight mercury concentration in fish tissue was 0.14 ppm for the 4 samples collected at this location. The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species: Sacramento Pikeminnow- 2 composite samples, 0.22 and 0.29 ppm, no exceedences; and Sacramento Sucker- 2 composite samples, both 0.03 ppm , no exceedences. All 9 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at two locations from this reach of the Sacramento River: near Colusa at the Bridge Street bridge; and downstream from Hamilton City near the confluence with Pine Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during two sampling events conducted during 1998 and 2000.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plans prepared for Sacramento River Watershed Program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26346

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at four locations from this reach. A total of 29 out of 93 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health. 1) Sacramento River downstream from Colusa: 22 samples, 9 exceedences, range 0.03-1.04 ppm, 0.32 ppm average wet weight concentration; 2) Sacramento River at Knights Landing: 41 samples, 13 exceedences, range 0.04-1.00 ppm, 0.29 ppm average wet weight concentration; 3) Sacramento River near Hamiliton City: 15 samples, 6 exceedences, range 0.05-0.55 ppm, 0.24 ppm average wet weight concentration; 4) Sacramento River at Tisdale Boat Ramp: 15 samples, 1 exceedence, range 0.08-0.32 ppm, 0.17 ppm average wet weight concentration. Fish tissue was analyzed from American Shad, Carp, Channel Catfish, Chinook Salmon, Hardhead, Largemouth Bass, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow and Sacramento Sucker. All 93 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

Fish Mercury Project, Year 2 Annual Report, Sport Fish Sampling and Analysis. Final Report. October 2007

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during three sampling events on 5/9/2006, 7/25/2006 and from 8/2/2006 to 8/2/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

2666

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three out of 5 samples exceeded. A total of 5 filet composites and one individual sample of largemouth bass were collected. The composite samples consisted of one each largemouth bass and Sacramento pike minnow, and 2 sucker composites. All samples were collected in 2002. Both largemouth bass samples and the pike minnow sample exceed the guideline. The sucker samples did not exceed the guideline (TSMP, 2002).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

0.3 ug/g - OEHHA Screening Value (Brodberg & Pollock, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Spatial Representation:

Two stations were sampled: in the Arnold Bend area (Colusa) and about one mile upstream from Colusa Drain outlet (Knights Landing). Based on comments received from the Regional Board the impairment will begin at Bend Bridge, just upstream of Red Bluff. Based on the comment letter received from the Regional Board, data collected by their office showed impairment as far upstream as bend Bridge. The listing for mercury is beginning at Bend Bridge, just upstream of Red Bluff.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected 9/13/2002 and 10/29/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1992-93 Data Report.

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

95582

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

166

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at six locations from this reach. A total of 85 out of 166 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health.
1) Sacramento River near Butte City: 20 samples, 12 exceedences, range 0.04-0.75 ppm, 0.33 ppm average wet weight concentration;
2) Sacramento River downstream from Colusa: 47 samples, 28 exceedences, range 0.04-0.90 ppm, 0.33 ppm average wet weight concentration;
3) Sacramento River downstream from Grimes: 33 samples, 16 exceedences, range 0.03-0.96 ppm, 0.26 ppm average wet weight concentration;
4) Sacramento River at Hamiliton City: 26 samples, 9 exceedences, range 0.01-1.15 ppm, 0.21 ppm average wet weight concentration;
5) Sacramento River at Ord Bend: 20 samples, 8 exceedences, range 0.02-1.14 ppm, 0.23 ppm average wet weight concentration;
6) Sacramento River at Woodson Bridge: 20 samples, 12 exceedences, range 0.02-1.26 ppm, 0.35 ppm average wet weight concentration.

Fish tissue was analyzed from Channel Catfish, Hardhead, Largemouth Bass, Rainbow Trout, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow, Sacramento Sucker and Steelhead Trout. All 166 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA 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.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during three sampling events: from 8/15/2005 to 8/17/2005; from 10/11/2005 to 10/12/2005; and on 10/31/2005.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

95577

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at four locations from this reach. A total of 42 out of 90 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health.

1) Sacramento River at Colusa: 18 samples, 12 exceedences, range 0.04-1.34 ppm, 0.33 ppm average wet weight concentration;
2) Sacramento River near Grimes: 34 samples, 13 exceedences, range 0.01-1.68 ppm, 0.23 ppm average wet weight concentration; 1 sample was not counted as it was below the method detection limit which is below the EPA evaluation guideline; 4 samples were not counted as they were below the method detection limit which is below the EPA evaluation guideline.
3) Sacramento River at Hamiliton City: 14 samples, 8 exceedences, range 0.01-1.76 ppm, 0.32 ppm average wet weight concentration;
4) Sacramento River at Ord Bend: 18 samples, 9 exceedences, range 0.01-1.50 ppm, 0.37 ppm average wet weight concentration; 2 samples were not counted as they were below the method detection limit which is below the EPA evaluation guideline.

Fish tissue was analyzed from Carp, Largemouth Bass, Rainbow Trout, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow, Sacramento Sucker and Smallmouth Bass. All 84 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

CVRWQCB. 2004. TMDL Fish Tissue Sampling- Cache Creek and Sacramento River Watersheds. Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board; and California Department of Fish and Game. Unpublished Data. August 2004.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA 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.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at four locations from this reach of the Sacramento River: near Colusa at the Bridge Street bridge; near Grimes and RM 125; near Hamilton City at the Hwy 32 bridge; and near Ord Bend at the Ord Ferry Road bridge.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during one sampling event from 10/14/2003 to 10/16/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005). .

QAPP Information:

Data Quality: Excellent.. Quality Control for all of the elements described in section 6.1.4 of the Policy was conducted in accordance with the Laboratory QAPP developed by Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML, 2005). This data was also collected and analyzed in accordance with the CALFED Mercury Project QAPP (Puckett and van Buuren, 2000).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69568

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for mercury is 1.06 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26292

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at four locations from this reach. A total of 23 out of 88 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health. 1) Sacramento River at Colusa: 17 samples, 5 exceedences, range 0.04-1.34 ppm, 0.33 ppm average wet weight concentration; 2) Sacramento River near Grimes: 34 samples, 6 exceedences, range 0.01-1.68 ppm, 0.23 ppm average wet weight concentration; 3) Sacramento River at Hamiliton City: 18 samples, 6 exceedences, range 0.01-1.76 ppm, 0.32 ppm average wet weight concentration; 4) Sacramento River at Ord Bend: 19 samples, 6 exceedences, range 0.01-1.50 ppm, 0.37 ppm average wet weight concentration. Fish tissue was analyzed from Carp, Largemouth Bass, Rainbow Trout, Redear Sunfish, Sacramento Pikeminnow, Sacramento Sucker and Smallmouth Bass. All 88 samples were collected from fish with total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during one sampling event from 10/14/2003 to 10/16/2003.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26350

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program: Freshwater Bioaccumulation Monitoring: TSM Program Data 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one location from this reach of the Sacramento River downstream from Hamilton City near the confluence with Pine Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The fish sample was collected on 7/30/1981.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 69009, Mercury	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26352

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were sampled for tissue analysis at two locations from this reach, at Colusa and Knights Landing. A total of 3 out of 5 samples exceeded the USEPA fish tissue criterion for human health. 1) Sacramento River at Colusa: The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species: Sacramento Pikeminnow- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.51 ppm, 1 exceedence; Sacramento Sucker- one 6-fish composite sample, 0.08 ppm, no exceedences. 2) Sacramento River at Knights Landing: The average wet weight mercury concentration in fish tissue was 0.52 ppm for the 3 samples collected at this location. The number of fish collected per sample, the measured mercury concentrations in fish tissue, and the number of exceedances are, by species: Largemouth Bass- 2 composite samples, 0.60 and 0.76 ppm, 2 exceedences; Sacramento Sucker- one 5-fish composite sample, 0.19 ppm, no exceedences. All 3 composite samples were collected from fish with average total lengths greater than 150 mm, which represent fish most commonly caught and consumed by sport fishers and their families.

Data Reference:

Toxic Substances Monitoring Program: Freshwater Bioaccumulation Monitoring Program 2001-2003. State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality. Unpublished Data

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at two locations from this reach of the Sacramento River at Colusa and Knights Landing.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected during two sampling events on 9/13/2002 and from 10/29/2002 to10/30/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

Significant gold mining activity occurred during the Gold Rush era within the Sacramento River watershed (USGS, 2005).

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent.. Quality Control for the fish sampling, tissue preparation, mercury analysis, and QA sample analysis portions of this study was conducted as described in the Environmental Chemistry Quality Assurance and Data Report for the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program, 2001-2002 (CDFG, 2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	74028	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. Four of the six samples exceed the fish tissue evaluation guideline for COMM. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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 six samples exceeded the fish tissue evaluation guideline for COMM and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74028, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

25694

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:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were analyzed for the presence of 48 individual PCB congeners and Aroclors 1248, 1254 and 1260. For the purpose of this assessment, data considered were the sum of PCB congeners (¿total PCBs¿), reported as ng/g, wet weight. The OEHHA and SWAMP recommend use of total PCBs for evaluating contamination. The values for each of the PCB congeners were surrogate corrected. For the purpose of determining the sum of PCB congeners, results for individual congeners that were below the reporting limit (0.199 ng/g) were treated as non-detects.

Total PCBs in four of the six composite samples collected from the Sacramento River between Red Bluff and Knights Landing exceeded 3.6 ng/g. Total PCBs by species (composite sample) were as follows: 102.499 ng/g in channel catfish collected at Colusa, 9.151 ng/g in channel catfish collected at Grimes, 6.504 in Sacramento sucker collected at Colusa, 5.767 in Sacramento sucker collected at Woodson Bridge, and 3.431 in Sacramento sucker collected at Ord Bend. For the Sacramento sucker composite sample collected at Hamilton City, none of the PCB congeners that were analyzed were recorded at values above the reporting limit (0.199 ng/g).

Composite samples consisted of equal-weight tissue samples from up to five fish of similar size and combined into a single 200 g composite sample (SRWP 2006).

Data Reference:

Sacramento River watershed program (SRWP) water quality database 1991-2003. Davis, CA

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal for total PCBs in fish is 3.6 ng/g (3.6 ppb), wet weight, to protect human health. This concentration in fish tissue should not be exceeded, based on a total fish and shellfish consumption rate of 8 ounces per week (prior to cooking) (32 g/day) (OEHHA 2008). This goal incorporates a maximum cancer risk level of one in a million (no more than one additional cancer in a population of one million people consuming these fish).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River at Colusa, Grimes, Hamilton City, Ord Bend, and Woodson Bridge.

Temporal Representation:

Fish samples were collected at Colusa on 16 August 2005 and 11 October 2005; Grimes on 12 October 2005; Hamilton City on 31 October 2005; Ord Bend on 15 August 2005; and Woodson Bridge on 15 August 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Sampling and analyses were conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento River Watershed Program, Monitoring 2005-2007 (SRWP 2006). Fish tissue samples were collected by the California Department of Fish and Game Moss Landing Marine Lab, using protocols detailed in Sampling and Processing Trace Metal and Synthetic Organic Samples of Marine Mussels, Freshwater Clams, Marine Crabs, Marine and Freshwater Fish and Sediments: DFG Method 102 (CDFG 2001). A holding time violation was noted in the dataset for all samples included in this line of evidence. The amount of time by which the holding time was exceeded was not provided.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74028, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69581

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 2 samples collected for Total PCBs exceeded the evaluation guideline.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affects beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total PCB is 676 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at the following stations 504SACHMN (Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 520SACLSA (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on 6/30/2008 and 8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	74627	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Toxicity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This decision has not changed. No new data was assessed for this waterbody/pollutant combination. This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess 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 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. Twenty-four of 108 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia (survival or reproductive toxicity) exceeded the narrative toxicity objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Thirteen of 54 samples tested with Pimephales (survival or reproductive toxicity) exceeded the narrative toxicity objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Two of 44 samples tested with Selenastrum exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 6. Zero of two sediment samples tested with hyalella azteca exceeded the narrative toxicity objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 7. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69630

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. None of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity test included survival and growth of Hyalella azteca.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at stations 504SACHMN and 520SACLSA.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected in June and August 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26226

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven-day growth toxicity tests were conducted with Pimephales promelas. Nine of 54 samples exhibited significant reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control and violated the narrative toxicity objective. Growth endpoints for P. promelas were not statistically compared to control results if survival endpoints were significantly less than the controls. The following is a summary of the test results by year.

Growth Endpoint
1999-2000
Sacramento River near Hamilton City
This location was not included in the 1998-1999 monitoring effort.

Sacramento River at Colusa
Three of the 12 samples exhibited significant reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected on the following dates (percent of control in parentheses): 19 August 1998 (81), 15 December 1998 (87), and 17 March 1999 (72).

2003-2004
Sacramento River near Hamilton City
None of the 4 samples were reported to have exhibited significant reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control. However, growth endpoints for P. promelas were not statistically compared to control results if survival endpoints were significantly less than the controls, as was the case with samples collected on 9 June 2004 and 27 July 2004. The results reported for the 20 January 2004 and 3 February 2004 are those from tests modified to control pathogen-related mortality.

Sacramento River at Colusa
Two of the 4 samples exhibited significant reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected during the following dates: 9 June 2004 and 27 July 2004. The data summary does not provide the corresponding data for the control associated with each test, but rather provides the range of data for separate controls associated multiple tests. Therefore, percent of control was included in this assessment. The results reported for the 20 January 2004 and 3 February 2004 are those from tests modified to control pathogen-related mortality.

2006-2007
Sacramento River near Hamilton City
None of the 17 samples exhibited significant reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control. The test organisms in the site water collected on 25 April 2007 exhibited ¿pathogen-related mortalities¿ and were excluded from evaluation of ambient toxicity (SRWP 2008). The 25 April 2007 sampling event was not included in this assessment.

Sacramento River at Colusa
Four of the 17 samples exhibited significant reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control. Toxic samples were collected on the following dates (percent of control in parentheses): 30 May 2006 (87), 6 July 2006 (81), 12 December 2006 (79), and 27 June 2007 (86). The test organisms in the site water collected on 25 April 2007 exhibited ¿pathogen-related mortalities¿ and were excluded from evaluation of ambient toxicity (SRWP 2008). The 25 April 2007 sampling event was not included in this assessment.

Data Reference:

Sacramento River watershed program (SRWP) water quality database 1991-2003. Davis, CA

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control with 7-day growth toxicity tests. Significant toxicity is defined as a statistically significant (p<0.5) reduction in growth compared to the laboratory control.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City and at Colusa.

Temporal Representation:

1998 -1999: Samples were collected monthly from June 1998 through May 1999.
2003 - 2004: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: mid-wet season (20 January 2004); post-organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (3 February 2004); rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2004); and dry season, low flows (27 July 2004).
2006-2007: Sampling was generally conducted on a monthly basis from April 2006 through August 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2003, 2006). The test results reported for 20 September 2006 were those of a re-test (SRWP 2008). The test organisms in the site water collected on 25 April 2007 exhibited ¿pathogen-related mortalities¿ and were excluded from evaluation of ambient toxicity (SRWP 2008). The 25 April 2007 sampling event was not included in this assessment.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

22870

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

108

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven-day reproduction toxicity tests were conducted with Ceriodaphnia dubia in association with Sacramento River Watershed Program annual monitoring activities at two locations (near Hamilton City and at Colusa). Nineteen (19) of the 108 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control and violated the narrative toxicity objective. The following is a summary of toxicity test results by site and year.Reproduction Endpoint1999-2000Sacramento River near Hamilton CityThis location was not included in the 1998-1999 monitoring effort.Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 12 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control.1999-2000Sacramento River near Hamilton CityOne of the 11 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected 15 February 2000 (80% of control). Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 12 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. 2000-2001Sacramento River near Hamilton CityThis site was not included in the 2000-2001 monitoring activities.Sacramento River at ColusaFour of the 9 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. Toxic samples were collected on the following dates: 20 September 2000, 30 October 2000, 26 January 2001, and 21 June 2001 (66% of control). The data summary does not provide the corresponding data for the control associated with each test (with the exception of 21 June 2001), but rather provides the range of data for separate controls associated multiple tests. Therefore, percent of control was not calculated.2001-2002Sacramento River near Hamilton CityOne of the 4 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 14 May 2002. Percent of control not included for same reason as 2000-2001 monitoring summary. Sacramento River at ColusaTwo of the 4 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected on 21 February 2002 and 15 May 2002. Percent of control not included for same reason as 2000-2001 monitoring summary. 2002-2003Sacramento River near Hamilton CityNone of the 6 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 6 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. 2003-2004Sacramento River near Hamilton CityThree of the 4 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected during the following dates: 20 January 2004, 9 June 2004, and 27 July 2004. Percent of control not included for same reason as 2000-2001 monitoring summary.Sacramento River at ColusaTwo of the 4 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected during the following dates: 9 June 2004 and 27 July 2004. Percent of control not included for same reason as 2000-2001 monitoring summary.2006-2007Sacramento River near Hamilton CityTwo of the 18 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected on the following dates (percentage of control response provided in parentheses): 25 October 2006 (82) and 25 April 2007 (74).Sacramento River at ColusaFour of the 18 samples exhibited significant reduction in reproduction compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected on the following dates (percentage of control response provided in parentheses): 20 April 2006 (83), 25 July 2006 (75), 25 April 2007 (82), and 6 June 2007 (83).

Data Reference:

Sacramento River watershed program (SRWP) water quality database 1991-2003. Davis, CA

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control with 7-day reproduction toxicity tests. Significant toxicity is defined as decreased reproduction that is statistically different from controls at the 95% confidence level.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City and at Colusa.

Temporal Representation:

1998-1999: Samples werecollected monthly from June 1998 through May 1999.
1999 - 2000: Samples were collected from the Sacramento River at Colusa on a monthly basis from June 1999 through May 2000 (12 sampling events) and from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City on a monthly basis from July 1999 through May 2000 (11 sampling events).
2000 - 2001: Samples were collected on 20 July 2000, 20 September 2000, 18 October 2000, 30 October 2000, 26 January 2001, 7 February 2001, 8 April 2001, 29 May 2001, and 21 June 2001.
2001 - 2002: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: late dry season, low flows (25 September 2001); seasonal first-flush storm (2-3 November 2001); significant rainfall of >0.5 inches, organophosphate pesticide application period (20-21 February 2002); and rice field discharge period, late wet season (14-15 May 2002).
2002 - 2003: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: late dry season, low flows (2 October 2002); first significant storm event of season (9-10 November 2002); rain event, organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (23-24 January 2003); late wet season, rain events (15-16 March 2003 and 5 & 13 April 2003); and rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2003).
2003 - 2004: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: mid-wet season (20 January 2004); post-organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (3 February 2004); rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2004); and dry season, low flows (27 July 2004).
2006 - 2007: Sampling was generally conducted on a monthly basis from April 2006 through August 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

26227

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven-day survival toxicity tests were conducted with Pimephales promelas. Four of the 54 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control and violated the narrative toxicity objective. The following is a summary of the test results by year.
Survival Endpoint
1998-1999
Sacramento River near Hamilton City
This location was not included in the 1998-1999 monitoring effort.

Sacramento River at Colusa
One of the 12 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 3 February 2004 (60% survival), 62% of control.

2003-2004
Sacramento River near Hamilton City
Two of the 4 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples were collected on the following dates: 9 June 2004 (15% survival) and 27 July 2004 (5% survival).

Sacramento River at Colusa
None of the 4 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control.

2006-2007
Sacramento River near Hamilton City
One of the 17 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample (survival reported as a percentage of control response is provided in the parentheses) was collected on 12 December 2006 (45). The test organisms in the site water collected on 25 April 2007 exhibited ¿pathogen-related mortalities¿ and were excluded from evaluation of ambient toxicity (SRWP 2008). The 25 April 2007 sampling event was not included in this assessment.

Phase I Toxicity Identification Evaluations (TIEs) were conducted using the 12 December 2006 sample. The toxicity was persistent during the TIEs. The magnitude of the toxicity was not decreased and onset of the toxicity was not delayed. None of the TIE treatments removed the toxicity (SRWP 2008). No analyte list pesticides were detected in the sample (SRWP 2008). The sample was extracted for organic analyses ~2.5 days after sample collection (SRWP 2008).

Sacramento River at Colusa
None of the 17 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The test organisms in the site water collected on 25 April 2007 exhibited ¿pathogen-related mortalities¿ and were excluded from evaluation of ambient toxicity (SRWP 2008). The 25 April 2007 sampling event was not included in this assessment.

Data Reference:

Sacramento River watershed program (SRWP) water quality database 1991-2003. Davis, CA

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control with 7-day survival toxicity tests. Significant toxicity is defined as a statistically significant (p<0.5) increase in mortality (≥20%) compared to the laboratory control.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

All samples were collected from the Sacramento River above Bend Bridge.

Temporal Representation:

1998 -1999: Samples were collected monthly from June 1998 through May 1999.
2003 - 2004: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: mid-wet season (20 January 2004); post-organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (3 February 2004); rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2004); and dry season, low flows (27 July 2004).

2006-2007: Sampling was generally conducted on a monthly basis from April 2006 through August 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

22633

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four-day growth tests were conducted with Selenastrum capricornutum in association with Sacramento River Watershed Program annual monitoring activities. Two of the 44 samples exhibited a significant decrease in growth as compared to the laboratory control and violated the narrative toxicity objective. The following is a summary of monitoring results by site and year. 2003 - 2004: Sacramento River near Hamilton City - None of the 4 samples exhibited a significant decrease in growth (cell numbers) as compared to the laboratory control. Sacramento River at Colusa - None of the 4 samples exhibited a significant decrease in growth (cell numbers) as compared to the laboratory control. 2006 - 2007: Sacramento River near Hamilton City - None of the 18 samples exhibited a significant decrease in growth as compared to the laboratory control. The results reported for the sample collected on 6 July 2006 were those of a re-test (SRWP 2008). Sacramento River at Colusa - Two of the 18 samples exhibited a significant decrease in growth as compared to the laboratory control. The toxic samples (growth response reported as a percentage of control response is provided in parentheses) were collected on 25 July 2006 (57) and 14 March 2007 (44). Phase I Toxicity Identification Evaluations (TIEs) were performed on the sample collected from the Sacramento River at Colusa on 14 March 2007. The sample was not toxic during the TIE testing, indicating that the toxicity was not persistent, the magnitude of the toxicity had decreased, and the contaminant that caused the toxicity was susceptible to rapid degradation. Metals and herbicides are two classes of contaminants that are of concern when algal toxicity is observed. As metals are typically conserved (i.e., toxicity from metals should not be expected to degrade over time), it is unlikely that metals could have caused the toxicity. There were no pesticides detected in the SRCOL [Sacramento River at Colusa] sample, which was extracted for analyses by the analytical lab 1.6 days after sample collection (SRWP 2008).

Data Reference:

Sacramento River watershed program (SRWP) water quality database 1991-2003. Davis, CA

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control with a short-term chronic (4-day) growth test.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City and at Colusa.

Temporal Representation:

2003 - 2004: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: mid-wet season (20 January 2004); post-organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (3 February 2004); rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2004); and dry season, low flows (27 July 2004). 2006 - 2007: Sampling was generally conducted on a monthly basis from April 2006 through August 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

4515

Pollutant:

Unknown Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Unspecified

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

Unspecified

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Unspecified

Temporal Representation:

Unspecified

Environmental Conditions:

Unspecified

QAPP Information:

Unspecified

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74627, Toxicity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

22857

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

108

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven-day survival toxicity tests were conducted with Ceriodaphnia dubia in association with Sacramento River Watershed Program annual monitoring activities at two locations (near Hamilton City and at Colusa). Five of the 108 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control and violated the narrative toxicity objective. The following is a summary of toxicity test results by site and year.Survival Endpoint1998-1999Sacramento River near Hamilton CityThis location was not included in the 1998-1999 monitoring effort. Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 12 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. 1999-2000Sacramento River near Hamilton CityNone of the 11 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control.Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 12 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. 2000-2001Sacramento River near Hamilton CityThis site was not included in the 2000-2001 monitoring activities.Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 9 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control.2001-2002Sacramento River near Hamilton CityOne of the 4 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 25 September 2001 (100% mortality).Sacramento River at ColusaOne of the 4 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 25 September 2001 (100% mortality).2002-2003Sacramento River near Hamilton CityOne of the 6 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 15 March 2003 (100% mortality). Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 6 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control.2003-2004Sacramento River near Hamilton CityNone of the 4 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control.Sacramento River at ColusaNone of the 4 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control.2006-2007Sacramento River near Hamilton CityOne of the 18 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 12 December 2006 (initial test: 0% of control response, immediate re-test: 40% of control response). It should be noted that of the 12 water samples collected from across the watershed during this sampling event (December 2006), 11 caused complete mortality of the test organisms in the initial test.Phase I Toxicity Identification Evaluations (TIEs) were conducted using the 12 December 2006 sample. Although persistent during the TIEs, the toxicity was delayed and its magnitude was decreased. Toxicity was removed by the following TIE treatments: C-8 Solid Phase Extraction and piperonyl butoxide (PBO). This suggests that dissolved non-polar organic contaminants and metabolically-activated substances, or a substance with both properties, caused the toxicity (SRWP 2008). Sacramento River at ColusaOne of the 18 samples exhibited a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control. The toxic sample was collected on 12 December 2006 (initial test: 0% of control response, immediate re-test: 40% of control response). It should be noted that of the 12 water samples collected from across the watershed during this sampling event (December 2006), 11 caused complete mortality of the test organisms in the initial test.Phase I Toxicity Identification Evaluations (TIEs) were conducted using the 12 December 2006 sample.

Data Reference:

Sacramento River watershed program (SRWP) water quality database 1991-2003. Davis, CA

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control with 7-day survival toxicity tests. Significant toxicity is defined as mortality (>20%) that is statistically different from controls at the 95% confidence level.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City and at Colusa.

Temporal Representation:

1998 - 1999: Samples were collected monthly from June 1998 through May 1999.
1999 - 2000: Samples were collected from the Sacramento River at Colusa on a monthly basis from June 1999 through May 2000 (12 sampling events) and from the Sacramento River near Hamilton City on a monthly basis from July 1999 through May 2000 (11 sampling events).
2000 - 2001: Samples were collected on 20 July 2000, 20 September 2000, 18 October 2000, 30 October 2000, 26 January 2001, 7 February 2001, 8 April 2001, 29 May 2001, and 21 June 2001.
2001 - 2002: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: late dry season, low flows (25 September 2001); seasonal first-flush storm (2-3 November 2001); significant rainfall of >0.5 inches, organophosphate pesticide application period (20-21 February 2002); and rice field discharge period, late wet season (14-15 May 2002).
2002 - 2003: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: late dry season, low flows (2 October 2002); first significant storm event of season (9-10 November 2002); rain event, organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (23-24 January 2003); late wet season, rain events (15-16 March 2003 and 5 & 13 April 2003); and rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2003).
2003 - 2004: Sampling was scheduled to correspond to the following events/dates: mid-wet season (20 January 2004); post-organophosphate pesticide dormant spray application (3 February 2004); rice field discharge season, dry weather event (9 June 2004); and dry season, low flows (27 July 2004).
2006 - 2007: Sampling was generally conducted on a monthly basis from April 2006 through August 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84506	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zeo of two samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84506, Arsenic	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69517

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for arsenic is 33 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	74926	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Bifenthrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 zero samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74926, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69518

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two sediment sample results were not used in the assessment because after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized the results were above the guideline, therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84508	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of two samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84508, Cadmium	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69519

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cadmium is 4.98 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90083	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Chlordane
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 two samples exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90083, Chlordane	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69520

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 2 sample collected exceeded the criteria for chlordane concentration (Sum of trans-Chlordane, cis-Chlordane, cis-Nonachlor, trans-Nonachlor, and Oxychlordane).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The Probable Effect Concentration for Chlordane in freshwater sediments is 17.6 ug/kg(MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at the following stations 504SACHMN (Sac R @ Hamilton City)and 520SACLSA (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on 6/30/2008 and 8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	68329	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the measurements exceed the water quality guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient 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 CDFG criteria used complies with the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 3. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 4. None of the 36 samples obtained from 1998, 1999 and 2000 from this site exceeded the CDFG criteria. Zero of zero samples exceeded the sediment evaluation guideline. 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68329, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69526

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68329, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

2663

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data was obtained from the USGS NWISweb data, a 1998, 1999 and 2000 California Department of Pesticide Regulation SWDB study, SRWP 1998-2000 database. None of 36 samples exceeded the CDFG criteria. Some of the concentrations were cited as less than values and as such could not be used in this assessment. (USGS, 2005), (LWA, 2002b).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

CDFG Hazard Assessment Criteria - 14 ng/L 4-day average and 25 ng/L 1-hour average.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from the following locations on the Sacramento River: Colusa, Hamilton, the Colusa Drain and Bryte.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were taken from 1996 - 2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data from USGS reports are considered of adequate quality per section 6.1.4 of the Policy. Data from the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP) Waters Quality Database (Larry Walker Associates, April 2002) are considered adequate.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84835	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Chromium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline. Zero of two samples exhibited sediment toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used 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 the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline. Sediment toxicity data is not available for this waterbody. Zero of two samples exhibited sediment toxicity. 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84835, Chromium	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69527

Pollutant:

Chromium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that two of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Chromium.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for chromium is 111 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84835, Chromium	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69630

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. None of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity test included survival and growth of Hyalella azteca.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at stations 504SACHMN and 520SACLSA.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected in June and August 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84879	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84879, Copper	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69528

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for copper is 149 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84694	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Cyfluthrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84694, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69529

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84695	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Cyhalothrin, Lambda
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment elevation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment elevation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84695, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69535

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84696	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Cypermethrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84696, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69536

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90084	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 two samples exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90084, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69537

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two sediment samples were collected; the samples did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (28.0 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDD (o,p' + p,p') is 28.0 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84971	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84971, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69538

Pollutant:

DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two sediment samples were collected; the samples did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (31.3 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDE is 31.3 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	85013	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Deltamethrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85013, Deltamethrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69545

Pollutant:

Deltamethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	68423	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Diazinon
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Six of the 179 samples exceed the water column criteria for COLD. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Six of the 179 samples exceed the water column criteria for COLD. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency in table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68423, Diazinon	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

2665

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 13 samples exceeded the CDFG criteria. (Spector et al., 2004).

Data Reference:

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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the executive Officer. Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the Maximum Contaminant Levels set forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15.
Pesticide concentrations shall not exceed those allowable by applicable antidegradation policies (see State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 68-16 and 40 C.F.R. Section 131.12). Pesticide concentrations shall not exceed the lowest levels technically and economically achievable. A trend in declining water quality has not been established per the Policy in section 3.1.10.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

CDFG Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.16 ug/L 1-hour average. (Siepman & Finlayson, 2000; Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

All samples were taken at the Sacramento River at Colusa

Temporal Representation:

Two storm events were sampled for the 2004 TMDL project in the Sacramento River Basin. For storm 1 sampling was conducted from 28 January to 3 February. For storm 2 the sampling period began on 16 February and extended until 21 February.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data from CDFA are considered of adequate quality.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68423, Diazinon	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69546

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68423, Diazinon	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

2664

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

166

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

There were 181 samples total but 15 were considered to be of "questionable" quality and therefore were not used for this assessment. Of the remaining 166 samples, 6 exceeded the acute criteria. When the chronic criteria could be applied, 2 out of 20 data set averages (4-day) exceeded the chronic criteria. (Dileanis et al., 2002), (Dileanis, 2003a), (Dileanis, 2003b), (Holmes et al., 2000), (LWA, 2002b).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

CDFG Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.16 ug/L 1-hour average (acute), 0.10 ug/L 4-day average (chronic). (Siepman & Finlayson, 2000; Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from the following locations on the Sacramento River: at Bend Ferry Rd Bridge, Butte City, Colusa, Hamilton City, Vina and the Colusa Drain.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were taken from 1994 - 2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	90141	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Electrical Conductivity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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 the two samples exceed the Criteria/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 two samples exceeded Criteria/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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90141, Electrical Conductivity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

59513

Pollutant:

Electrical Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two samples were collected. One of the 2 samples exceeded the 90 percentile objective. Since <90% of the samples collected met the objective, the objective was exceeded once.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The objectives for electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids in Table III-3 apply to the water bodies specified. To the extent of any conflict with the general Chemical Constituents water quality objectives, the more stringent shall apply. Table III-3 states that the electrical conductivity (at 25 deg. shall not exceed 230 micromhos/cm (50 percentile) or 235 micromhos/cm (90 percentile) at Knights Landing above Colusa Basin Drain.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River below Red Bluff station (504SACRBF).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on the following dates: 5/18/2009 5/26/2009

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP (2008).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90142	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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 one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 two samples exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90142, Endrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69556

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The samples did not exceed the evaluation guideline value for Endrin.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for endrin is 207 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	85014	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85014, Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69559

Pollutant:

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	84743	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Fenpropathrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84743, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69565

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90143	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
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. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five water samples analyzed for E. coli and for total coliform exceed the evaluation guideline for the water contact recreation beneficial use. Zero of 23 water samples analyzed for fecal coliform exceed the evaluation guideline for the water contact recreation beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of five samples exceeded 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 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90143, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69558

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Escherichia coli.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA recommended objective for a single-sample maximum allowable density of E. coli in freshwater designated-beach areas is 235 MPN/100mL.

Guideline Reference:

40 CFR Part 131 Water Quality Standards for Coastal and Great Lakes Recreation Waters; Final Rule [Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 220]

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90143, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69557

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of 3 sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Escherichia coli.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The U.S. EPA recommended objective for a single-sample maximum allowable density of E. coli in freshwater designated-beach areas is 235 MPN/100mL.

Guideline Reference:

40 CFR Part 131 Water Quality Standards for Coastal and Great Lakes Recreation Waters; Final Rule [Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 220]

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Lower Sacramento River at Anderson, Woodson Boat Ramp - 508SHA901]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 8/27/2008-9/3/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90143, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

22853

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Department of Water Resources collected 25 samples from March 2002 to April 2004. The geometric mean per month per site was calculated from the samples and 0 out of the 23 calculated geometric means exceeded the evaluation objective.

Data Reference:

Project effects on water quality designated beneficial uses for surface waters, and results for bacterial monitoring of swimming areas in 2003. FERC Project No. 2100. Sacramento, CA: State of CA Department of Water Resources

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

In waters designated for contact recreation (REC-1), the fecal coliform concentration based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period shall not exceed a geometric mean of 200/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of the total number of samples taken during any 30-day period exceed 400/100 ml.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River upstream of Feather River.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred from March 2002 to April 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Quality Control for all of the elements described in section 6.1.4 of the Policy was conducted in accordance with the Laboratory QAPP developed by the State of California Resources Agency Department of Water Resources (DWR, 2005). Quality Assurance Project Plan for Oroville Facilities Relicensing
FERC Project No. 2100 SP-W1. Department of Water Resources (DWR). Oroville Facilities Relicensing FERC Project No. 2100. January 2005.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84745	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Lead
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of two samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84745, Lead	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69566

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for lead is 128 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90144	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 two samples exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90144, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69567

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Sediment samples were collected from two locations and analyzed for the SWAMP.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Lindane (gamma-HCH) is 4.99 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90200	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Methyl Parathion
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90200, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69569

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for methyl parathion, 0.6 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 6 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for methyl parathion (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	85053	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Zero of two samples exhibited sediment toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used 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 the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Zero of two samples exhibited sediment toxicity. 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85053, Nickel	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69630

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. None of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity test included survival and growth of Hyalella azteca.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at stations 504SACHMN and 520SACLSA.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected in June and August 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85053, Nickel	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69576

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that two of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Nickel.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for nickel is 48.6 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90201	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 13 samples exceed the COLD, zero of the two samples exceed the Fish spawning water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 the 13 samples exceed the COLD, zero of the two samples exceed the Fish spawning water quality 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90201, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69578

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90201, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

59508

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 2 samples collected exceeded the objective.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The dissolved oxygen concentrations shall not be reduced below the following minimum levels at any time: Waters designated COLD 7.0 mg/l

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Sacramento River below Red Bluff station (504SACRBF).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on the following dates: 5/18/2009 5/26/2009

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90201, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69579

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90201, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69580

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data to determine beneficial use support: One of 9 sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. The DO level (7.98 mg/L) in the sample collected on 8/7/2007 did not meet the seasonal objective of 9.0 mg/L for Sacramento River from Keswick Dam to Hamilton City.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. In the Sacramento River from Keswick Dam to Hamilton City, 9.0 mg/L from 1 June to 31 August. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Sacramento River near Hamilton City-504XSRNHC].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected monthly between 2/8/2007 and 8/7/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.


DECISION ID	84794	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Permethrin, total
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84794, Permethrin, total	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69593

Pollutant:

Permethrin, total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for permethrin, 0.89 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 8.9 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for permethrin (Amweg et al. 2005).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90260	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the one samples exceed the COLD, zero of the three samples exceed the MUN water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the one samples exceed the COLD, zero of the three samples exceed the MUN water quality 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90260, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69548

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for electrical conductivity.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), an upper level (1,600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2,200 uS/cm). The recommended level of 900 uS/cm was used as it is protective of all drinking water uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Lower Sacramento River at Anderson, Woodson Boat Ramp - 508SHA901]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 8/31/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90260, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69612

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample collected did not exceed the objective.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Table III-3 of the Sacramento/San Joaquin Basin plan (2011) states that electrical conductivity shall not exceed 230 micromhos/cm (50 percentile) or 235 micromhos/cm (90 percentile) at Knights Landing above Colusa Basin Drain.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected from the Sacramento River at Woodson Bridge Boat Ramp station (508SHA901).

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected on 8/31/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

SWAMP QAPP (2008).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90260, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69555

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the criterion for electrical conductivity.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90261	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the three samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 three samples exceeded water quality objective for water temperature, 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90261, Temperature, water	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69614

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that one of two water temperature measurements exceed the water quality objective for Water Temperature.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The temperature shall not be elevated above 56°F in the reach from Keswick Dam to Hamilton City nor above 68°F in the reach from Hamilton City to the I Street Bridge during periods when temperature increases will be detrimental to the fishery. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Water temperature was measured on 5/18/2009 and 5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90261, Temperature, water	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69613

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that the single water temperature measurement did not exceed the water quality objective for Water Temperature.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Lower Sacramento River at Anderson, Woodson Boat Ramp - 508SHA901]

Temporal Representation:

The water temperature measurement was made on 8/31/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90323	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

Pollutant:	Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. 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 two samples exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90323, Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69617

Pollutant:

Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two sediment samples were collected; the samples did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (572 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total DDTs (sum DDT + sum DDD + sum DDE) is 572 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 6/30/2008 ( Sac R @ Hamilton City) and 8/19/2008 (Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street).

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	68170	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the two samples exceed the sediment evaluation guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of two samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples 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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68170, Zinc	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69631

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for zinc is 459 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [ Sac R @ Hamilton City - 504SACHMN, Sacramento River at Colusa near Bridge Street - 520SACLSA]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/30/2008-8/19/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	90203	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

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. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the three samples exceed each of the COLD, MUN, and Water Contact Rec Criteria/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 the three samples exceed each of the COLD, MUN, and Water Contact Rec Criteria/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 Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90203, pH	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69594

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Lower Sacramento River at Anderson, Woodson Boat Ramp - 508SHA901]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 8/31/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90203, pH	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69597

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90203, pH	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69598

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90203, pH	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69595

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Lower Sacramento River at Anderson, Woodson Boat Ramp - 508SHA901]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 8/31/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90203, pH	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69599

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Sacramento River below Red Bluff - 504SACRBF]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 5/18/2009-5/26/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90203, pH	Region 5
Sacramento River ( Red Bluff to Knights Landing)

LOE ID:

69596

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference: