Draft California 2020 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)
Water Body ID:	CAR5183206220080915143905
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	75348	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

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. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Decision is "insufficient info" since the binomial test requires a minimum sample size of 26. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 22 samples exceeded the fecal coliform 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:	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 75348, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

22550

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Department of Water Resources collected 24 samples from March 2002 to March 2004. The geometric mean per month per site was calculated from the samples and 0 out of the 22 calculated geometric means exceeded the evaluation objective.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Water samples were collected from the Fall River upstream of Feather Falls.

Temporal Representation:

Water samples were collected typically monthly between 28 March 2002 to 15 March 2004 but, occasionally, samples were collected twice per month, or every two months.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. DWR. 2005. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Oroville Facilities Relicensing FERC Project No. 2100 SP-W1. Department of Water Resources (DWR). Oroville Facilities Relicensing FERC Project No. 2100. January 2005.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan for Oroville Facilities Relicensing FERC Project No. 2100. Study Plan W1, Project Effects on Water Quality Designated Beneficial Uses for Surface Waters


DECISION ID	75737	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. 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. None 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. None of 55 samples fell below the criteria outlined in the Basin Plan 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. 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 75737, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

26132

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

52 samples were taken from the Fall River between May and December 2005. No sample exceeded Water Quality Objectives for minimum dissolved oxygen concentrations (7 mg/L).

Data Reference:

Pit 1 Hydrolelectric Project (FERC 2687) biological study and water quality reports and Hat Creek Project (FERC 2661) biological report

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007a) - (COLD), Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L - (SPWN), Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from four locations: Fall River above the project diversion to Pit1 forebay, Fall River at Pit 1 Forebay Dam, Fall River Pond at Weir, and Lower Fall River near confluence at Pit River.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected between May and November 2005 at biweekly interval.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Described in the report (PG&E, 2006)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75737, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

26131

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

3 samples were taken from the Fall River from June to September 2006. No sample exceeds Water Quality Objectives for minimum dissolved oxygen concentration (7 mg/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:

Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007a) - (COLD), Minimum Dissolved Oxygen concentration of 7mg/L - (SPWN), Minimum Dissolved Oxygen concentration of 7mg/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Fall River Ranch Bridge.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected between June and September 2006 at monthly interval.

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	75736	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four 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. Four of 36 samples had pH values higher than the pH objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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 75736, pH	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

26130

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition and the California Rice Commission collected 8 samples from May 2005 to September 2006. Four of the 8 samples did not meet the evaluation objective and had a pH higher than 8.5.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,raised above 8.5, or changed at any time more than 0.5 units from normal ambient pH. Measurement of pH within the range of 6.5 and 8.5. A high pH value is greater 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:

Samples were collected from Fall River at Fall River Ranch Road

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred from May 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 75736, pH	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

22552

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Twenty-eight samples were taken from the Fall River between March 2002 and April 2004. None of the samples were outside the acceptable pH range.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Fall River upstream Feather Falls.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected between March 2002 and April 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

DWR. 2005. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Oroville Facilities Relicensing FERC Project No. 2100 SP-W1. Department of Water Resources (DWR). Oroville Facilities Relicensing FERC Project No. 2100. January 2005.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	74282	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

Pollutant:	Toxicity
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. 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. Seven 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 in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Seven of 10 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia exceeded the narrative toxicity objective (reproductive toxicity) and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. 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 74282, Toxicity	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

22079

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

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:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Seven of the 10 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia exhibited reproductive toxicity and violated the narrative toxicity objective. Reproductive toxicity occurred in samples collected on the following dates (percent of control is indicated in parentheses): 16 May 2002 (53), 15 July 2002 (57), 13 November 2002 (67), 14 July 2003 (78), 15 September 2003 (54), 13 November 2003 (85), and 18 February 2004 (80).

Data Reference:

Oroville Facilities Relicensing-FERC Project No. 2100. Contaminant accumulation in fish, sediments, and the aquatic food chain. Sacramento, CA: State of CA Department of Water Resources

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances (CVRWQCB, 2007).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 7-day reproduction toxicity tests (USEPA, 1994; DWR, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Fall River upstream of Feather Falls.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on the following dates: 16 May 2002, 15 July 2002, 24 September 2002, 13 November 2002, 18 February 2003, 15 April 2003, 14 July 2003, 15 September 2003, 13 November 2003, and 18 February 2004. Sampling events were conducted during the high temperature months of July and September, following the first flush in the fall, following winter dormant spraying in February, and again during the high runoff period in April or May.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74282, Toxicity	Region 5
Fall River, tributary to Feather River, Middle Fork (Butte and Plumas Counties)

LOE ID:

22085

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

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:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 10 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia were toxic (survival endpoint) and violated the narrative toxicity objective.

Data Reference:

Oroville Facilities Relicensing-FERC Project No. 2100. Contaminant accumulation in fish, sediments, and the aquatic food chain. Sacramento, CA: State of CA Department of Water Resources

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 7-day survival toxicity tests (USEPA, 1994; DWR, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Fall River upstream of Feather Falls.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):