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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Dry Creek (Madera County)
Water Body ID:	CAR5452000020080806143824
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	89437	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 89437, Aldicarb	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62799

Pollutant:

Aldicarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Aldicarb.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	93563	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of thirteen water sample results exceed the calculated 1-hour-average acute criterion for freshwater where salmonid fish are present. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of thirteen water sample results exceed the calculated 1-hour-average acute criterion for freshwater where salmonid fish are present, and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.1 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 this water body and 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 93563, Ammonia as N, Total	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

78965

Pollutant:

Ammonia as N, Total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirteen water samples collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) were analyzed for ammonia, pH and temperature. None of the 13 samples have ammonia levels above the calculated CMC values.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

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:

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

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in South San Joaquin Irrigation District, 2004-2008.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) at one monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Road 18 - 545XDCARE].

Temporal Representation:

Thirteen water samples were collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) monthly during the first eight months of 2007 and 2008 (between 2/11/2007 and 8/26/2008)

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	99993	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 99993, Arsenic	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62800

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 99993, Arsenic	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62809

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85822	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 85822, Atrazine	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62810

Pollutant:

Atrazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Atrazine.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85822, Atrazine	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62811

Pollutant:

Atrazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Atrazine.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89438	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 89438, Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62812

Pollutant:

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos methyl. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85880	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 85880, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62813

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirteen samples were collected and analyzed for Bifenthrin. The reporting level for all 13 samples is greater than the evaluation guideline value. Therefore, none of the samples were evaluated for exceedances; i.e., 0 samples, 0 exceedances.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89440	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 fourteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the fourteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 89440, Boron	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

79580

Pollutant:

Boron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Boron.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85922	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 85922, Cadmium	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62822

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART, Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85923	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85923, Carbaryl	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62823

Pollutant:

Carbaryl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Carbaryl.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89304	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 89304, Carbofuran	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62825

Pollutant:

Carbofuran

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Carbofuran.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 89304, Carbofuran	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62824

Pollutant:

Carbofuran

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Carbofuran.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake 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 freshwater criterion maximum concentration for carbofuran is 0.5 µg/L (DFG 92-3, 1992).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	75457	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of 7 samples exceeded the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, 1 of 7 samples exceeded the 1-hour average concentration criterion and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

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 75457, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

22006

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven water samples were collected from Dry Creek in 2005 and 2006 representing 7 4-day average concentrations and 7 1-hour average concentrations. These samples have appropriate method detection limits.1 of 7 four-day average concentrations exceeded the four day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.1 of 7 one-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour chlorpyrifos concentration of 0.025 ug/L.

Data Reference:

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

Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Evaluation Guideline:

California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected from Dry Creek at Road 18.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly in August and September in 2005 and monthly from May through September 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85104	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 23 samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 23 samples exceed the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85104, Copper	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62826

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 23 samples exceed the criterion for Copper.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 3 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART, Dry Creek @ Rd 28 1/2 - 545XDCATE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89305	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 89305, Cyanazine	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62827

Pollutant:

Cyanazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Cyanazine.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85128	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 85128, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62834

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85239	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 85239, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62835

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85240	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 85240, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62836

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89525	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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 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 water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 89525, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

78807

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The DDD method detection limit for all 13 samples collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) are greater than the criterion; therefore, the data could not be assessed with the accuracy required by the Listing Policy

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007) Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000), for Inland Surface Waters based on drinking water and aquatic organism consumption. The criteria are based on human health protection for carcinogenicity at 1-in-a-million risk level (30-day average) with a limit of 0.00083 ug/L for DDD

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Thirteen water samples were collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]. Each sample was analyzed for DDD(p,p').

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected monthly between 2/11/2007 and 8/21/2007 and between 1/25/2008 and 8/26/2008

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data was collected under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	73801	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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 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 water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 73801, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

78869

Pollutant:

DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The DDE method detection limit for all 13 samples collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) are greater than the criterion; therefore, the data could not be assessed with the accuracy required by the Listing Policy

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Thirteen water samples were collected from Dry Creek (Madera County) [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]. Each sample was analyzed for DDE(p,p').

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected monthly between 2/11/2007 and 8/21/2007 and between 1/25/2008 and 8/26/2008

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data was collected under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	89526	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 89526, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62837

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for DDT(p,p). Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 89526, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62843

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89527	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 89527, Dicofol	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62845

Pollutant:

Dicofol

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Dicofol.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	89528	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 89528, Dieldrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62847

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 89528, Dieldrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62846

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85455	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85455, Dimethoate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62853

Pollutant:

Dimethoate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Dimethoate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88304	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 88304, Disulfoton	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62854

Pollutant:

Disulfoton

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Disulfoton. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88305	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 88305, Endrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62857

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88305, Endrin	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62856

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85456	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 85456, Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62865

Pollutant:

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85507	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 85507, Glyphosate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62866

Pollutant:

Glyphosate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Glyphosate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85507, Glyphosate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62867

Pollutant:

Glyphosate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Glyphosate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	75459	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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 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. Four of the twenty samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Four of the twenty samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are 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 75459, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

22000

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition collected 7 samples from February 2005 to September 2006. Two out of 7 samples exceeded the evaluation objective.

Data Reference:

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

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA E. Coli objective of 235/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA 1986).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Dry Creek at Road 18.

Temporal Representation:

Monthly sampling occurred from February 2005 to September 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75459, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62864

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:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88306	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88306, Linuron	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62868

Pollutant:

Linuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Linuron.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85562	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 85562, Malathion	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62874

Pollutant:

Malathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Malathion. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88385	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88385, Methidathion	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62875

Pollutant:

Methidathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Methidathion.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88386	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88386, Methiocarb	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62876

Pollutant:

Methiocarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Methiocarb.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85616	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85616, Methomyl	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62877

Pollutant:

Methomyl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Methomyl.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88464	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 88464, Methoxychlor	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62883

Pollutant:

Methoxychlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Methoxychlor.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88464, Methoxychlor	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62884

Pollutant:

Methoxychlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Methoxychlor.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88465	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

State Board 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 88465, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62885

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Methyl. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The California Department of Fish and Game instantaneous aquatic life criterion for Methyl Parathion is 0.08 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Environmental Services Division. Administrative Report 92-1

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88466	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 88466, Molinate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62887

Pollutant:

Molinate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Molinate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Molinate is 20 ug/L .

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88466, Molinate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62886

Pollutant:

Molinate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Molinate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Molinate, 600 ug/L, the maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85672	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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 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 fourteen samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the fourteen samples exceed the 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85672, Nickel	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62888

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nickel is 0.1 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	71984	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 71984, Nitrogen, Nitrate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62894

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nitrate (NO3 as N) is 10.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88542	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the water quality criteria. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the water quality criteria and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88542, Nitrogen, Nitrite	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62895

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrite

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrite as N.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for nitrite (as N) is 1 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88544	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88544, Oxamyl (Vydate)	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

79583

Pollutant:

Oxamyl (Vydate)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Oxamyl.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Oxamyl incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 50 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	99994	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the twenty-one samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD, and zero of the nine samples exceed the water quality objective for WARM. 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. Two of the twenty-one samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD, and zero of the nine samples exceed the water quality objective for WARM 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 are 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 99994, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

22011

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine samples were taken from the Dry Creek between 2005 and 2006. None of the nine samples fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan the (WARM) Warm Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 5mg/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Dry Creek at Road 18 in Madera County.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected between August 2005 and September 2006. Samples were collected at bi-monthly and monthly intervals.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 99994, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62896

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: Two of 21 sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at three monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18-545XDCARE, Dry Creek @ Rd 28 1/2-545XDCATE and Dry Creek at Road 22-545XDCART].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected intermittently to monthly between 2/11/2007 and 9/30/2008. Three pairs of samples were collected within 7-day periods; the sample results for each pair were averaged. One triplet of samples was collected within 7-day period; the sample results were averaged.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85674	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85674, Paraquat	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62897

Pollutant:

Paraquat

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Paraquat.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Oryzalin, 1,200 ug/L, is an EC50 for Daphnia sp. (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85949	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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 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 evaluation guideline. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the zero samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85949, Permethrin, total	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62898

Pollutant:

Permethrin, total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Permethrin, Total. Thirteen samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88545	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88545, Phorate	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62753

Pollutant:

Phorate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Phorate.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for phorate, 0.2 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 2.0 ug/L) for Lepomis macrochirus (Bluegill sunfish). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88619	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88619, Phosmet	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62754

Pollutant:

Phosmet

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Phosmet.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Phosmet, 5.6 ug/L, is the EC50 for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85189	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of eleven samples exceed the California Primary MCL for MUN, and 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater (California Toxics Rule, 2000) for WARM. 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 eleven samples exceed the California Primary MCL for MUN, and 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater (California Toxics Rule, 2000) for WARM and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85189, Selenium	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62755

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for selenium is 0.05 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85189, Selenium	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62756

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	85244	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 85244, Simazine	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62762

Pollutant:

Simazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Simazine.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California primary maximum contaminant level for Simazine is 4 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85244, Simazine	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62757

Pollutant:

Simazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Simazine.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Simazine, 90 ug/L, is the EC50 for Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88696	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the twenty-six samples exceed the water quality criteria. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the twenty-six samples exceed the water quality criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88696, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62855

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:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 26 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 3 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART, Dry Creek @ Rd 28 1/2 - 545XDCATE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	95817	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Listing Policy. To determine the appropriate use support rating for COLD, an evaluation guideline identifying the optimal temperature range for rainbow trout for growth and completion of most life stages was used to interpret the narrative water quality objective for temperature. Section 6.1.5.2 of the Listing Policy states ¿¿samples should represent statistically or in a targeted manner the segment of the water body.¿ Water temperature data collected for this water body do not capture the spatial variability of temperatures experienced by aquatic life. Section 6.1.5.3 of the Listing Policy states ¿Samples should be representative of the critical timing that the pollutant is expected to impact the water body.¿ Water temperature data collected for this water body do not capture the temporal variability of temperatures experienced by aquatic life. Per Section 6.1.5.9 of the Listing Policy, ¿¿temperature monitoring data shall be compared to the temperature requirements of aquatic life living in the water segment.¿ Currently, the readily available data for water temperature in this segment are insufficient to determine whether growth and all life stages of rainbow trout are being supported. The monitoring program that generated the temperature data was not designed to evaluate attainment of temperature standards to support aquatic life. The surface water grab samples collected do not provide sufficient temporal and spatial representation of temperature conditions throughout the water body segment for fish exposure. 3. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 95817, Temperature, water	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62763

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:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 16 of 26 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Juoaquin River Basin Plans).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California (1976)

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 3 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART, Dry Creek @ Rd 28 1/2 - 545XDCATE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88621	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

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

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

State Board 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 88621, Thiobencarb/Bolero	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62765

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb/Bolero

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Thiobencarb.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of Thiobencarb in excess of 1.0 µg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88621, Thiobencarb/Bolero	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62764

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb/Bolero

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Thiobencarb.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb, 1.4 ug/L, is a maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) calculated for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88697	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the thirteen samples exceed the 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 are 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 88697, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

79581

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Dissolved Solids.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: At a minimum, water designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The secondary MCL for Total Dissolved Solids is 500 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85298	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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 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 fifteen samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the fifteen samples exceed the 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 85298, Zinc	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62772

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California secondary maximum contaminant level for zinc is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	88699	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the twenty-six samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the twenty-six samples exceed the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board 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 88699, pH	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

79584

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Nuisance

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:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 26 samples exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE, Dry Creek at Road 22 - 545XDCART, Dry Creek @ Rd 28 1/2 - 545XDCATE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-9/30/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	75509	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

Pollutant:	Toxicity
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four of 23 water samples exhibited significant toxicity. Two of six sediment samples exhibited significant toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Four of 23 water samples exhibited significant toxicity and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Two of six sediment samples exhibited significant toxicity and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board 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 75509, Toxicity	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

59134

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:

Six samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. Two of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Hyalella azteca. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at Dry Creek at Rd 18.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from September 2005 to August 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75509, Toxicity	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62766

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-three samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Four of the samples exhibited significant toxicity to Selenastrum cell growth (5/29/07, 1/25/08, 2/25/08, 3/4/08). The toxicity tests included survival of Ceriodaphnia dubia, survival of Pimephales promelas, and total cell count of Selenastrum capricornutum. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at Dry Creek at Rd 18.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from August 2005 to August 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	95168	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

Pollutant:	Diazinon
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by action other than TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by action other than TMDL)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Agriculture
Expected Attainment Date:	2026
Implementation Action Other than TMDL:	This water body segment-pollutant combination is being addressed through Basin Plan requirements established under CRWQCB-CVR resolution R5-2014-0041, and implemented through Board established Waste Discharge Requirements for agricultural discharges. The sources of diazinon to this segment have been identified as offsite movement of diazinon from diazinon applications by the agricultural dischargers regulated by the CRWQCB-CVR WDRs. The Basin Plan identifies numeric water quality objectives for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. The Basin Plan and WDRs require growers to implement management practices through the development and implementation of water quality management plans to meet water quality objectives for diazinon as soon as possible but no longer than ten years from the date of approval of the Basin Plan Amendment. These management plans are required to be developed and implemented within one year of the Basin Plan Amendment approval. Agricultural management practices to be implemented may include pest management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management practices and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diazinon into surface water. The Basin Plan and the Monitoring and Reporting programs in the WDRs require monitoring to determine if adequate reductions are being attained. The Basin Plan and WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until the water quality objectives are achieved.
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This water body - pollutant combination is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The evidence indicates that diazinon concentrations are not attaining the applicable water quality standards, but existing pollution control requirements, under State authority, are stringent enough to implement applicable water quality standards because the impairment is being addressed by an enforceable regulatory program, other than a TMDL, that is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standards within a reasonable, specified time frame. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of 13 available calculated 4-day average diazinon concentrations exceeded the 4-day average diazinon criterion. These exceedances occurred more than once every three years. 4. One of 13 available 1-hour average diazinon concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average diazinon criterion. This exceedance Did not occur more than once every three years. 5. The sources of diazinon to this water body segment have been identified as offsite movement of diazinon from diazinon applications by the agricultural dischargers, who are regulated under enforceable Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). 6. In 2016, the Board adopted Resolution R5-2014-0041 establishing Basin Plan amendments that primarily address the regulation of agricultural pesticide runoff and discharges of diazinon and chlorpyrifos in the Central Valley which are implemented through Board established Waste Discharge Requirements for agricultural dischargers. The amendments established numeric water quality objectives for diazinon and a control program to ensure that the objectives will be attained within a reasonable, specified time frame. The Basin Plan and WDRs require growers to implement management practices through the development and implementation of water quality management plans to meet water quality objectives for diazinon as soon as possible but no longer than ten years from the date of approval of the Basin Plan Amendment. These management plans are required to be developed and implemented within one year of the Basin Plan Amendment approval. 7. Agricultural management practices to be implemented may include pest management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management practices and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diazinon into surface water. 8. The Basin Plan and the Monitoring and Reporting programs in the Boards WDRs require monitoring to determine if adequate reductions are being attained. The Basin Plan and WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until the water quality objectives are attained. 9. 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 described in the lines of evidence associated with this decision, the Regional Water Board determined that this water body and pollutant combination is impaired and that it should be listed as being addressed by another regulatory program that is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame because an alternative State regulatory program is in place which can be reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:	The Basin Plan and WDRs require growers to implement management practices through the development and implementation of water quality management plans to meet water quality objectives for diazinon as soon as possible but no longer than ten years from the date of approval of the Basin Plan Amendment. These management plans are required to be developed and implemented within one year of the Basin Plan Amendment approval. 7. Agricultural management practices to be implemented may include pest management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management practices and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diazinon into surface water. 8. The Basin Plan and the Monitoring and Reporting programs in the Boards WDRs require monitoring to determine if adequate reductions are being attained. The Basin Plan and WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until the water quality objectives are attained. 9. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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 95168, Diazinon	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

62844

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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


DECISION ID	93891	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

Pollutant:	Diuron
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by action other than TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by action other than TMDL)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Agriculture
Expected Attainment Date:	2021
Implementation Action Other than TMDL:	This listing is being addressed through the implementation of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Irrigated Lands Regulatory program (ILRP) Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Growers within the Eastern San Joaquin River Watershed that are Members of the Third-Party Group (Order R5-2012-0016) and in Waste Discharge Requirements General Order for Discharges from Irrigated Lands within the Central Valley Region for Dischargers not Participating in a Third-party Group (Order R5-2013-0100). The sources of diuron to this waterbody segment have been identified as offsite movement of diuron from diuron applications by the agricultural dischargers regulated by the CRWQCB-CVR WDRs. The WDRs include a time schedule, milestones and a monitoring and reporting program. The WDRs require growers to develop and implement water quality management plans iteratively to attain water quality objectives as soon as possible, but no later than ten years from the identification of water quality exceedances. The WDRs monitoring and reporting program requires growers to regularly monitor water bodies with management plans to assess progress at meeting standards and regularly report monitoring results to the Regional Board. A management plan for diuron in Dry Creek was developed in 2011 and is being implemented and monitoring is ongoing. Agricultural management practices being used to reduce offsite movement of diuron into surface water include alternative weed management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diuron into surface water. The WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until water quality criteria are achieved. The diuron criteria are expected to be attained through continued implementation and improvement of management practices within the required 10-year compliance time frame.
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This water body pollutant combination is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The evidence indicates that diuron concentrations are not attaining the applicable water quality standards, but other pollution control requirements, under State authority, are stringent enough to implement applicable water quality standards. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates this water segment-pollutant combination is not meeting standards, but the impairment is being addressed by an enforceable regulatory program, other than a TMDL, that is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standards within a reasonable, specified time frame. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of 13 samples exceeded the water quality criterion and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. This listing is being addressed through the implementation of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Irrigated Lands Regulatory program (ILRP) Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Growers within the Eastern San Joaquin River Watershed that are Members of the Third-Party Group (Order R5-2012-0016) and in WDRs General Order for Discharges from Irrigated Lands within the Central Valley Region for Dischargers not Participating in a Third-party Group (Order R5-2013-0100). The WDRs include a time schedule, milestones and a monitoring and reporting program. The WDRs require growers to develop and implement water quality management plans iteratively to attain water quality objectives as soon as possible, but no later than ten years from the identification of water quality exceedances. A management plan for diuron in Dry Creek was developed in 2011 and is being implemented and monitoring is ongoing. Agricultural management practices being used to reduce offsite movement of diuron into surface water include alternative weed management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management and water management practices. The diuron criteria are expected to be attained through continued implementation and improvement of management practices within the required 10-year compliance time frame. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information described in the lines of evidence associated with this decision, the Regional Water Board determined that this water body and pollutant combination is still impaired and that it should be listed as being addressed by another regulatory program that is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame, because an alternative State regulatory program is in place which can be reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame.

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 93891, Diuron	Region 5
Dry Creek (Madera County)

LOE ID:

79582

Pollutant:

Diuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Dry Creek (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 13 samples exceed the criterion for Diuron.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Dry Creek (Madera County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Dry Creek @ Rd 18 - 545XDCARE]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 2/11/2007-8/26/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

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

QAPP Information:

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

QAPP Information Reference(s):