|
LOE ID: |
22733 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
6 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
6 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from May through October 2006, representing 6 4-day average concentrations and 6 1-hour average concentrations. 0 of 6 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.0 of 6 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour 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 |
|
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 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 |
|
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) 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 were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected monthly from May to October 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22731 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
7 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
7 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2005, representing 7 4-day average concentrations and 7 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 7 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 7 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (weekly, biweekly, and monthly) in March, June, July, and August 2005. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22734 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
35 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
61 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January 2000 through August 2001, representing 35 4-day average concentrations and 58 1-hour average concentrations. 0 of 35 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.1 of 58 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L. 3 samples were not used in this analysis because of high quantitation limit greater than the water quality criteria concentration (0.015 ug/L). |
Data Reference: |
Surface Water database (SWDB) for Central Valley waterbodies, 2000-2005 |
|
Correspondence between the Department of Pesticide Regulation and Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding water quality data for waterbodies in the Central Valley |
|
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 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 |
|
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (daily, weekly, and monthly) between January 2000 and August 2001. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides |
|
|
LOE ID: |
2759 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Wildlife Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
|
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
|
Temporal Representation: |
|
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
QA Info Missing |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22721 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
18 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
18 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from March to August 2003, representing 18 4-day average concentrations and 18 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 18 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 1 of 18 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (weekly and biweekly) from March to August 2003. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22722 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
4 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River in January 2005, representing 1 4-day average concentrations and 4 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 1 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 4 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at daily in one storm in January 2005. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22732 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
8 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
8 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2006, representing 8 4-day average concentrations and 8 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 8 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 8 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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 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 |
|
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at weekly in March, July, and August 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
DECISION ID |
12157 |
|
Pollutant: |
.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. 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 8 samples exceeded the minimum criterion for Alpha-HCH listed under the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12157 |
|
LOE ID: |
21652 |
|
Pollutant: |
.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
8 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
- Sixty-two water samples were taken from the San Joaquin River near Stevinson, California between June 1994 and August 2001. - The Sixty-two water samples were averaged on a weekly basis and resulted in eight water samples that were assessed for exceedance. - None of the eight samples exceeded the minimum criterion for Alpha-HCH in surface water listed under the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria.- Numerous samples had high Reporting Limits hence the data could not be used in the analysis (Listing Policy Section 6.5.1.1) (SWRCB, 2004). |
Data Reference: |
National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data |
|
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 (CVRWQCB, 2007). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Guideline <0.0026 g/L. |
Guideline Reference: |
National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA |
|
Quality Criteria for Water 1986. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Regulations and Standards. Washington D.C. EPA 440/5-86-001. |
|
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Patterson and at the WSID Pump near Westley, California. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between June 1994 and August 2001. Samples were collected at weekly intervals. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7913 |
|
Pollutant: |
Ammonia |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 39 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.1 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 39 has 4 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria.
The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7913 |
|
LOE ID: |
6436 |
|
Pollutant: |
Ammonia |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
39 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 39 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Ammonia. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Ammonia levels should not to exceed the calculated limit. Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection (Salmonid present) Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) (1-hour Average (mg N/L)) calculated based on the following formula: CMC = (0.275/(1 + 107.204-pH)) + (39.0/(1 + 10pH-7.204)) which incorporates pH (US EPA, 2005: Appendix C) |
Guideline Reference: |
Compilation of Water Quality Goals |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. Samples were collected at SJR @ Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Mar 31 1994 to Jun 21 2007 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
12167 |
|
Pollutant: |
Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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.
Five 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 46 samples exceeded the Water Quality 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12167 |
|
LOE ID: |
22709 |
|
Pollutant: |
Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
17 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
17 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from April to August 2003, representing 17 concentrations.0 of 17 available concentrations exceeded the criterion of 0.01 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Water quality criterion is 0.01 ug/L for freshwater and marine aquatic life in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Criteria for Water [The Red Book] (USEPA, 1976). http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/redbook.pdf |
Guideline Reference: |
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (weekly and biweekly) from April to August 2003. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22720 |
|
Pollutant: |
Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
6 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
6 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from May through October 2006, representing 6 concentrations. 0 of 6 concentrations exceeded water quality criterion of 0.015 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 |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Water quality criterion is 0.01 ug/L for freshwater and marine aquatic life in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Criteria for Water [The Red Book] (USEPA, 1976). http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/redbook.pdf |
Guideline Reference: |
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected monthly from May to October 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22719 |
|
Pollutant: |
Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
11 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
11 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from February through August 2006, representing 11 concentrations.0 of 11 available concentrations exceeded water quality criterion of 0.015 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Water quality criterion is 0.01 ug/L for freshwater and marine aquatic life in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Criteria for Water [The Red Book] (USEPA, 1976). http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/redbook.pdf |
Guideline Reference: |
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals from February through August 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22710 |
|
Pollutant: |
Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
5 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
5 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River in January 2005, representing 5 concentrations. None of 5 available 4 concentrations exceeded the water quality criterion of 0.015 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Water quality criterion is 0.01 ug/L for freshwater and marine aquatic life in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Criteria for Water [The Red Book] (USEPA, 1976). http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/redbook.pdf |
Guideline Reference: |
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at daily in one storm in January 2005. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22711 |
|
Pollutant: |
Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
7 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
7 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2005, representing 7 concentrations.1 of 7 available concentrations exceeded the water quality criterion of 0.01 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Water quality criterion is 0.01 ug/L for freshwater and marine aquatic life in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Criteria for Water [The Red Book] (USEPA, 1976). http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/redbook.pdf |
Guideline Reference: |
Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (weekly, biweekly, and monthly) in March, June, July, and August 2005. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
DECISION ID |
7915 |
|
Pollutant: |
Cadmium |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 16 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7915 |
|
LOE ID: |
6440 |
|
Pollutant: |
Cadmium |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
16 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 16 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Cadmium. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) Dissolved Cadmium levels should not exceed the calculated limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average dissolved)=(EXP(1.128*LN(hardness)-3.6867))*(1.136672-(LN(hardness)*0.041838)) (CTR) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Compilation of Water Quality Goals |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jun 7 2001 to Nov 21 2002 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
8136 |
|
Pollutant: |
Copper |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. 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 24 samples exceed the California Toxics Rule 4-day average criteria for dissolved Copper 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8136 |
|
LOE ID: |
6443 |
|
Pollutant: |
Copper |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
24 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
None of the 24 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Copper. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
California Toxics Rule 4-day average criteria for dissolved Copper. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Nov 21 2002 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
12229 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDE |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. Two 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. Two of 49 samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 μg/L for DDE based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12229 |
|
LOE ID: |
21900 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDE |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
49 |
Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
- Forty-nine (49) water samples were collected from the San Joaquin River near Stevinson between April of 1992 and August of 2001. Two of the available forty-nine samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 ug/L for DDE (p,p'-DDE; o,p'-DDE) based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms.- Forty-seven water samples had a high Reporting Limit hence data could not be used in the analysis according to the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. |
Data Reference: |
|
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)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) for DDE of less than 0.00059 ug/L. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency |
|
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River (Bear Creek to Mud Slough) reach, near Stevinson in California. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected from April of 1992 through August of 2001. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
12225 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dacthal |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. 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 34 water samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline for Dacthal (DCPA), which is based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Ambient Water Quality Criteria value of 70 µg/L, 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12225 |
|
LOE ID: |
21931 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dacthal |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
17 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
17 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River @ Lander Avenue from March 2005 through August 2005, representing 17 concentrations. None of 17 concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration of 70 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Ambient Water Quality Criteria - 70 ug/L not to be exceeded more than once every year. (U.S. EPA, NAWQA) |
Guideline Reference: |
National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from February 2006 through August 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
21930 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dacthal |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
17 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
7 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River @ Lander Avenue from March 2005 through August 2005, representing 7 concentrations.0 of 17 concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration of 70 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Ambient Water Quality Criteria - 70 ug/L not to be exceeded more than once every year. (U.S. EPA, NAWQA) |
Guideline Reference: |
National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from March 2005 through August 2005. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
DECISION ID |
12346 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dieldrin |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. 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. It was not possible to assess if any of the available Ten water samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for Dieldrin of 0.00014 μg/L based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk level for water and fish consumption since the samples had high Reporting Limits, hence this exceeded 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12346 |
|
LOE ID: |
22034 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dieldrin |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
- Sixty-two water samples were taken from San Joaquin River (Bear Creek to Mud Slough) near Stevinson. - Based on a 30-Day average, there were Ten water samples. - It was not possible to assess if any of the available Ten water samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for Dieldrin of 0.00014 ug/L based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk level for water and fish consumption. This was because the samples had high Reporting Limits hence this data cannot be used in the analysis (Listing Policy, Section 6.5.1.1) (SWRCB, 2004). |
Data Reference: |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
- Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan CVRWQCB. 2007Pesticides: 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 Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for Dieldrin of 0.00014 ug/L based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk level for water and fish consumption (USEPA, 2000). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River (Bear Creek to Mud Slough) near Stevinson, Merced County, California. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between October 1992 and August 2001. Samples were collected at weekly intervals. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
14006 |
|
Pollutant: |
Diuron |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. 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 6 samples exceeded the narrative toxicity 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14006 |
|
LOE ID: |
22712 |
|
Pollutant: |
Diuron |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
4 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
4 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from July through October 2006, representing 4 concentrations.0 of 4 available concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration of 1.3 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 |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
The Board will use the best available technical information to evaluate compliance with the narrative objectives. Other available technical information on the pesticide (such as Lowest Observed Effect Concentrations and No Observed Effect Levels), the water bodies and organisms involved will be evaluated to determine if lower concentrations are required to meet the narrative objectives. (CRWQCB, 2006).The 96 hour EC50 for the most sensitive species, Chlorella pyrenoidosa is 1.3 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008 and Ma et al. 2001). |
Guideline Reference: |
Ecotox database, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/ |
|
Acute toxicity of 33 herbicides to the green alga Chlorella pyrenoidosa. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 66:536-541. Springer-Verlag New York Inc. |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Ave. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected from July through October 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22713 |
|
Pollutant: |
Diuron |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
2 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
2 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January to February 2006, representing 2 concentrations.1 of 2 available samples exceeded the concentration of 1.3 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
The Board will use the best available technical information to evaluate compliance with the narrative objectives. Other available technical information on the pesticide (such as Lowest Observed Effect Concentrations and No Observed Effect Levels), the water bodies and organisms involved will be evaluated to determine if lower concentrations are required to meet the narrative objectives. (CRWQCB, 2006).The 96 hour EC50 for the most sensitive species, Chlorella pyrenoidosa is 1.3 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008 and Ma et al. 2001). |
Guideline Reference: |
Ecotox database, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/ |
|
Acute toxicity of 33 herbicides to the green alga Chlorella pyrenoidosa. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 66:536-541. Springer-Verlag New York Inc. |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Ave. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected once in February and once in March 2006 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006 |
|
DECISION ID |
14004 |
|
Pollutant: |
Ethyl p-nitrophenyl (EPN) |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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 28 samples exceeded the minimum criterion Water Quality Objectives for Ethyl p-nitrophenyl (EPN) listed for Drinking Water Health Advisories or Suggested No-Adverse-Response Levels for non-cancer health effects 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14004 |
|
LOE ID: |
22864 |
|
Pollutant: |
Ethyl p-nitrophenyl (EPN) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
28 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Twenty-eight samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 2004 and 2006. One of the twenty-eight samples exceeds USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) for maximum EPN content in surface water. |
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 |
|
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 (CVRWQCB, 2007). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency |
|
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) was used as a drinking water level guideline of < 0.07 ug/L |
Guideline Reference: |
National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue and WSID Pumps. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between July 2004 and July 2006. Samples were collected at 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): |
|
DECISION ID |
7916 |
|
Pollutant: |
Lead |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 24 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7916 |
|
LOE ID: |
6444 |
|
Pollutant: |
Lead |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
24 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 24 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Lead. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) Dissolved Lead levels should not exceed the calculated value based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average, dissolved)=(EXP(1.273*LN(hardness)-1.46))*(1.46203-(LN(hardness)*0.145712)) (CTR) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Compilation of Water Quality Goals |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Nov 21 2002 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
14008 |
|
Pollutant: |
Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. None 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 the available forty-six (46) samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for human consumption of water and organisms with a 10-6 risk for carcinogens of 0.019 mg/g 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14008 |
|
LOE ID: |
21653 |
|
Pollutant: |
Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
46 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Sixty-two water samples were collected from the San Joaquin River near Stevinson (Bear Creek to Mud Slough) between June 1994 and August 2001. Samples collected on the same date were averaged resulting in forty six water samples that were assessed for exceedance. None of the forty six samples exceeded the CTR criteria of 0.019 mg/g for human consumption of water and organisms. |
Data Reference: |
Surface Water database (SWDB) for Central Valley waterbodies, 2000-2005 |
|
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) based on criteria for human consumption of water and organisms with a 10-6 risk for carcinogens of 0.019 mg/g. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River near Stevinson (Bear Creek to Mud Slough) in California. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at weekly intervals between June 1994 and August 2001. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7917 |
|
Pollutant: |
Molybdenum |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 143 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Using BinomBal listing is recommended if a sample size of 143 has 24 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria.
The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7917 |
|
LOE ID: |
6448 |
|
Pollutant: |
Molybdenum |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
143 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 143 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Molybdenum. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) Molybdenum levels should not to exceed 50 ug/L (Basin Plan Objective) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. Samples were collected at SJR @ Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Oct 25 1995 to Nov 16 2006 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7918 |
|
Pollutant: |
Nickel |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 24 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7918 |
|
LOE ID: |
6451 |
|
Pollutant: |
Nickel |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
24 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 24 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Nickel. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) Dissolved Nickel levels should not exceed the calculated limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average, dissolved)=(EXP(0.846*LN(hardness)+2.255))*(0.998)(CTR) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Compilation of Water Quality Goals |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Nov 21 2002 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7919 |
|
Pollutant: |
Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3) |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 116 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.1 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 116 has 10 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria.
The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7919 |
|
LOE ID: |
6452 |
|
Pollutant: |
Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
116 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 116 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nitrate-N. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Nitrate-N levels should not to exceed 100 mg/L (USEPA National Ambient Water Quality Objective) |
Guideline Reference: |
National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. Samples were collected at SJR @ Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jun 29 2000 to Jun 21 2007 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
14002 |
|
Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. Forty-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. Forty-one of 534 samples exceeded fell below the minimum criterion water quality objective listed in the Sacramento/San Joaquin River 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14002 |
|
LOE ID: |
22744 |
|
Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
31 |
Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Thirty-one samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 2004 and 2006. Two of the thirty-one 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 |
|
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 |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan the (COLD) Cold Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between July 2004 and October 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22745 |
|
Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
503 |
Number of Exceedances: |
39 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Five hundred and three samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 2001 and 2006. Thirty-nine of the Five hundred and three samples fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water. |
Data Reference: |
Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan the (COLD) Cold Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue and Fremont Ford. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between June 2001 and June 2006. Samples were collected at bi-monthly and monthly intervals. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
|
|
DECISION ID |
14012 |
|
Pollutant: |
Sediment Toxicity |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. 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 2 samples exceeded the narrative toxicity 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14012 |
|
LOE ID: |
22667 |
|
Pollutant: |
Toxicity |
LOE Subgroup: |
Toxicity |
Matrix: |
Sediment |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
2 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
TOXICITY TESTING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
None of the 2 samples tested with Hyalella azteca were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. |
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 |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 10-day Hyalella azteca sediment toxicity tests. |
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: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected from September 2004 to September 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Excellent. 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 |
8135 |
|
Pollutant: |
Selenium |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 685 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Using BinomBal listing is recommended if a sample size of 685 has 59 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria.
The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8135 |
|
LOE ID: |
6945 |
|
Pollutant: |
Selenium |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
685 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Zero of the 1872 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Selenium. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) Selenium levels should not to exceed 5 ug/L (CTR) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. Samples were collected at SJR @ Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jan 4 2001 to Sep 27 2007 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7920 |
|
Pollutant: |
Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 24 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7920 |
|
LOE ID: |
6457 |
|
Pollutant: |
Zinc |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
24 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 24 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Zinc. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
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. (CRWQCB, 2006) Dissolved Zinc levels should not exceed the calculated limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration=EXP((0.8473*LN(hardness))+0.884)*(0.978) (CTR) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Compilation of Water Quality Goals |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Nov 21 2002 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
14009 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. Forty-eight 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. Forty-eight of 1122 samples exceeded 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14009 |
|
LOE ID: |
22756 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1077 |
Number of Exceedances: |
46 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 1077 samples from October 1995 to June 2006. Forty-six out of 1077 samples were outside the acceptable range; 36 samples were higher than the acceptable range and ten samples were lower than the acceptable range. |
Data Reference: |
Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review |
|
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. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Measurement of pH within the range of 6.5 and 8.5 |
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from two locations: San Joaquin River at Fremont Ford and San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred from October 1995 to June 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
|
|
|
LOE ID: |
22748 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
45 |
Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition collected 45 samples from July 2004 to October 2006. Two out of 45 samples were outside the acceptable range; one sample was higher than the acceptable range and one sample was lower than the acceptable range. |
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 |
|
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. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Measurement of pH within the range of 6.5 and 8.5 |
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred from July 2004 to October 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 |
7914 |
|
Pollutant: |
Arsenic |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Sources: |
Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2021 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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 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 43 arsenic samples exceeded the USEPA Primary MCL 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7914 |
|
LOE ID: |
6438 |
|
Pollutant: |
Arsenic |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
43 |
Number of Exceedances: |
7 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Seven of the 43 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Arsenic. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Arsenic levels should not exceed 10 ug/L (USEPA Primary MCL) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at SJR @ Fremont Ford. Samples were collected at SJR @ Lander Avenue. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jun 7 2001 to Nov 21 2002 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
14011 |
|
Pollutant: |
Escherichia coli (E. Coli) |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Sources: |
Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2021 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
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. Twenty-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 for 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. Twenty-one of 128 samples exceeded the E. Coli objective and this exceeds 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. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14011 |
|
LOE ID: |
22746 |
|
Pollutant: |
Escherichia coli (E. Coli) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
|
Number of Samples: |
7 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The Westside San Joaquin River Water Quality Coalition collected 7 samples from August 2004 to October 2006. Zero out of the 7 samples collected exceeded the evaluation objective. |
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 |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 San Joaquin River at Lander. |
Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred August 2004 to October 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22747 |
|
Pollutant: |
Escherichia coli (E. Coli) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
|
Number of Samples: |
121 |
Number of Exceedances: |
21 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 121 samples from August 2002 to June 2006. Twenty-one out of the 121 samples exceeded the evaluation objective. |
Data Reference: |
Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review |
|
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: |
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region |
|
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 San Joaquin River at Lander. |
Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred from August 2002 to June 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
|
|
DECISION ID |
7569 |
|
Pollutant: |
Mercury |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Resource Extraction |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2012 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under sections 4.1 and 4.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list.
This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7569 |
|
LOE ID: |
4532 |
|
Pollutant: |
Mercury |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Tissue |
Matrix: |
Tissue |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7564 |
|
Pollutant: |
Boron |
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)(2006) |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7564 |
|
LOE ID: |
4528 |
|
Pollutant: |
Boron |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Agricultural Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7565 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDT |
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)(2006) |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2011 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7565 |
|
LOE ID: |
4529 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDT |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Tissue |
Matrix: |
Tissue |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7566 |
|
Pollutant: |
Electrical Conductivity |
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)(2006) |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7566 |
|
LOE ID: |
4530 |
|
Pollutant: |
Electrical Conductivity |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Agricultural Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7568 |
|
Pollutant: |
Group A Pesticides |
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)(2006) |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2011 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7568 |
|
LOE ID: |
4531 |
|
Pollutant: |
Group A Pesticides |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Tissue |
Matrix: |
Tissue |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |