|
LOE ID: |
22727 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
126 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
138 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from December 2005 through November 2007, representing 126 4-day average concentrations and 138 1-hour average concentrations. 0 of 126 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.0 of 138 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (daily during storms and weekly during non-storms) from December 2005 through November 2007 |
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: |
2812 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
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: |
22707 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
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: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
16 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River in January and February 2005, representing 2 4-day average concentrations and 16 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 2 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 16 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at daily in two storms in January and February 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: |
22706 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
10 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
13 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2004, representing 10 4-day average concentrations and 13 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 10 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 1 of 13 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at weekly interval in March, July, and August 2004. |
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: |
22705 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
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: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
18 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River in February 2004, representing 2 4-day average concentrations and 18 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 2 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily during two storms in February 2004. |
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: |
22704 |
|
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: |
0 |
|
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.0 of 18 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 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 Vernalis. |
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: |
22716 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
14 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
14 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2005, representing 14 4-day average concentrations and 14 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 14 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 14 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at weekly in March, 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: |
22717 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
27 |
Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
42 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between January and August 2006, representing 27 4-day average concentrations and 42 1-hour average concentrations.2 of 27 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 2 of 42 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 two sites: Vernalis and Airport. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily during two storms from January to February 2006, and 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 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22718 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
100 |
Number of Exceedances: |
5 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
209 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January 2000 through June 2005, representing 100 4-day average concentrations and 135 1-hour average concentrations. 5 of 100 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.2 of 135 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L. 74 samples were not used in this analysis because of high quantitation limit (0.04 ug/L) 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (daily, weekly, and monthly) between January 2000 and June 2005. |
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: |
22695 |
|
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: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
22 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January to March 2003, representing 7 4-day average concentrations and 22 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 7 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 22 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour chlorpyrifos 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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily during two storms in February and March 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 |
|
DECISION ID |
12164 |
|
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. 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 228 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 12164 |
|
LOE ID: |
23353 |
|
Pollutant: |
.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
228 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Two hundred and twenty-eight samples (based on a weekly average) were analyzed from the San Joaquin River between 1992 and 2005. One sample of the two hundred and twenty-eight samples exceeded the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria for minimum Alpha-HCH in surface water. - There were 126 samples that 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. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River near Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between April 1992 and April 2005. Samples were collected at monthly 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 |
7953 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 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 37 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.2 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 37 has 7 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 7953 |
|
LOE ID: |
6566 |
|
Pollutant: |
Ammonia |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
37 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 37 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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Feb 25 1999 to Feb 27 2003 |
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 |
7954 |
|
Pollutant: |
Arsenic |
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 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 22 samples exceeded the USEPA Primary MCL 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 7954 |
|
LOE ID: |
6580 |
|
Pollutant: |
Arsenic |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
22 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
None of the 22 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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jun 7 2001 to Jun 26 2003 |
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 |
7955 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 2 lines 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 3.2 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 7955 |
|
LOE ID: |
6569 |
|
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 @ Airport Way. |
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 |
12221 |
|
Pollutant: |
Cis-permethrin |
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. One line of evidence is 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 301 samples contained cis-permethrin at a level the exceeded the Evaluation Guideline (one-tenth the LC50 for Tanytarsus ap., a freshwater midge), and, therefore, only one sample exceeded the narrative toxicity 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 12221 |
|
LOE ID: |
21755 |
|
Pollutant: |
Cis-permethrin |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
301 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Three hundred-one water samples were collected from San Joaquin River near Vernalis, CA in April 1992 through August 2005 representing 301 concentrations.One sample had a cic-permethrin concentration less than the quantitation limits and quantitation limits greater than the water quality criteria concentrations. Therefore, the result of this sample was not used in this analysis, in accordance with section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. |
Data Reference: |
National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data |
|
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. ther 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. The 24-hour LC50 for cis-permethrin, for the most sensitive species (Tanytarsus sp., a midge) is 0.033 ug/L. Therefore, the one-tenth LC50 value for the cis-permethrin Evaluation Guideline is 0.0033 ug/L. |
Guideline 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 |
|
ECOTOX database, aquatic data. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River near Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from April 1992 through August 2005. |
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): |
National field manual for the collection of water quality data. Reston, VA. U.S. Geological Survey. Office of Water Quality |
|
DECISION ID |
7956 |
|
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 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 7956 |
|
LOE ID: |
6571 |
|
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 dissolved 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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from November 2000 to November 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 |
12227 |
|
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.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.
This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of 344 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 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 12227 |
|
LOE ID: |
21899 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dacthal |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
299 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
299 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River @ Vernalis/Airport Way from May 1992 through August 2005, representing 299 concentrations. None of 299 concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration of 70 ug/L. |
Data Reference: |
National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data |
|
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 Vernalis/Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from May 1992 through August 2005. |
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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
21932 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dacthal |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
14 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
14 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River @ Vernalis/Airport Way from March 2005 through August 2005, representing 14 concentrations. None of 14 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 Vernalis/Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from January 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 |
|
|
LOE ID: |
21933 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dacthal |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
31 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
31 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River @ Vernalis/Airport Way from January 2006 through August 2006, representing 31 concentrations. None of 31 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 Vernalis/Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected daily during two storms in January and March 2006 and at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from January 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 |
|
DECISION ID |
14057 |
|
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. Three 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. Three of 77 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 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 14057 |
|
LOE ID: |
22036 |
|
Pollutant: |
Dieldrin |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
77 |
Number of Exceedances: |
3 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
- Three hundred and three (303) water samples were taken from San Joaquin River (Stanislaus River to the Delta Boundary) between October 1992 and August 2005. - The actual number of samples analyzed based on a 30-day averaging period was Seventy-seven (77). - Three of the Seventy-seven water samples exceed 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.- Seventy-four data points were not used in the analysis because they had high Reporting Limits (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: |
- 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 taken from San Joaquin River near Vernalis (Stanislaus River to the Delta Boundary), San Joaquin County, California. |
Temporal Representation: |
- Samples were collected between October 1992 and August 2005. - 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 |
7957 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 2 lines 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 25 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 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 7957 |
|
LOE ID: |
6573 |
|
Pollutant: |
Lead |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
25 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 25 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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Nov 30 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 |
14058 |
|
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 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 the two hundred and three 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 14058 |
|
LOE ID: |
23354 |
|
Pollutant: |
Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
203 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Two hundred and ninety four samples were collected by the USGS between June 1994 and August 2001 from the San Joaquin River near Vernalis in the Stanislaus River to Delta Boundary reach. - The samples were averaged on a 4-day basis resulting in two hundred and three water samples that were assessed for exceedance. None of the averaged two hundred and three water samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for Lindane based on continuous concentration (4-day average) of 0.08 (g/g for freshwater Aquatic Life protection. |
Data Reference: |
National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data |
|
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 (USEPA, 2000) criteria continuous concentration (4-day average) of 0.08 ug/L for freshwater Aquatic Life protection. |
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 Vernalis in the Stanislaus River to Delta Boundary reach of the San Joaquin River, California. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at weekly intervals between June 1994 and August 2001. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data quality: Good. U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1-A9, available online at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7958 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 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 103 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.2 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 103 has 17 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 7958 |
|
LOE ID: |
6577 |
|
Pollutant: |
Molybdenum |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
103 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 103 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 15 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 @ Airport Way. |
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 |
7959 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 2 lines 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 25 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 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 7959 |
|
LOE ID: |
6579 |
|
Pollutant: |
Nickel |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
25 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 25 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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Nov 30 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 |
7960 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 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 35 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.2 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 35 has 6 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 7960 |
|
LOE ID: |
6581 |
|
Pollutant: |
Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
35 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 35 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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Feb 25 1999 to Feb 27 2003 |
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 |
14049 |
|
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. Five 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. Five of 258 samples exceeded the 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 14049 |
|
LOE ID: |
23314 |
|
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: |
254 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Two hundred and fifty-four samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 2001 and 2006. One of the two hundred and fifty-four samples fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water. |
Data Reference: |
National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data |
|
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 Airport Road, CA |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between June 2001 and June 2006. Samples were collected at 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
23328 |
|
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: |
4 |
Number of Exceedances: |
4 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Four samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 1993 and 2002. Four of the four samples fell below Water Quality Objectives for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water. |
Data Reference: |
|
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 near Vernalis, CA |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected between August 1993 and December 2002. Samples were collected at monthly 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 |
14060 |
|
Pollutant: |
Prometryn |
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 72 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 14060 |
|
LOE ID: |
23311 |
|
Pollutant: |
Prometryn |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
72 |
Number of Exceedances: |
1 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
72 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Vernalis.from January 2000 through September 2002 representing 72 concentrations. |
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: |
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 EC50 for the most sensitive species Navicula pelliculosa is 1 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000) |
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from January 2000 through September 2002. |
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 |
|
DECISION ID |
7961 |
|
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 2 lines 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 3.2 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 7961 |
|
LOE ID: |
6583 |
|
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 @ Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Nov 30 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 |
14061 |
|
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.
One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Forty-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. Forty-two of 545 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 14061 |
|
LOE ID: |
23330 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
545 |
Number of Exceedances: |
42 |
|
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 545 samples from October 1995 to June 2006. Forty-two out of 545 samples were outside the acceptable range; thirty-three samples were higher than the acceptable range and nine 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 San Joaquin River at Airport Way. |
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)
|
|
DECISION ID |
12238 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDE |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2011 |
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. Twenty-five 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. Twenty-five of 116 samples exceed 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 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 12238 |
|
LOE ID: |
21902 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDE |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
116 |
Number of Exceedances: |
25 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
- Five Hundred and eighty six water samples were averaged on a 30-day basis and resulted in one hundred and sixteen (116) water samples. These were collected from the San Joaquin River at Vernalis between the Stanislaus River and the Delta Boundary Reach from April 1992 through August of 2001. - Twenty-five of the one hundred and sixteen 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.- Ninety-one water samples had high reporting limits hence the data could not be used in the analysis according to the Listing Policy, Section 6.5.1.1. |
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 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 the San Joaquin River at Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected from April 1992 through August of 2001 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 |
13210 |
|
Pollutant: |
Diuron |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
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.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Fifteen 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. Fifteen of 91 samples exceed the narrative toxicity objective 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 13210 |
|
LOE ID: |
22697 |
|
Pollutant: |
Diuron |
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: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
20 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from October 2001 through November 2002, representing 18 concentrations and 2 samples were not used. 0 of 18 samples exceeded the criteria of 1.3 ug/L.2 samples were not used in this analysis because the estimated values are greater than the water quality criteria (1.3 ug/L). |
Data Reference: |
National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data |
|
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 near Vernalis |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected from October 2001 through November 2002 monthly interval. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
22696 |
|
Pollutant: |
Diuron |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
73 |
Number of Exceedances: |
15 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
73 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January 2000 through September 2002, representing 73 concentrations. 15 of 73 samples exceeded the maximum concentration of 1.3 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: |
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 Vernalis. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected at variable intervals (e.g. daily, weekly) from January 2000 through September 2002. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
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 |
|
DECISION ID |
13205 |
|
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.
One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Ten 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. Ten of 60 samples exceed 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 13205 |
|
LOE ID: |
23329 |
|
Pollutant: |
Escherichia coli (E. Coli) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
|
Number of Samples: |
60 |
Number of Exceedances: |
10 |
|
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 60 samples from July 2003 to June 2006. Ten out of the 60 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 Airport Way. |
Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred from July 2003 to June 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): |
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 |
15202 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
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 (Policy).
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. These are temperature data on two life stages for anadromous fish and information on the historical and current state of the fishery. A large number of seven-day averages of maximum (7DADM) daily temperatures exceeded the anadromous fish life stage temperature criteria.
Based on 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. Thirteen out of 13 yearly maximum 7DADM values calculated from temperature data collected during the adult migration life stage (Julian weeks 36 through 43) from 2001 through 2005 exceeded the narrative temperature objective, and this exceeds the minimum criteria for listing from Table 3.2 of the Policy.
4. Five of 7 yearly maximum 7DADM values collected during the smoltification life stage (Julian weeks 11 through 24) from 2002 to 2005 exceeded the narrative temperature objective, and this exceeds the minimum criteria for listing from Table 3.2 of the Policy.
5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
6. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4.5.7 of the Policy. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information,
RWQCB-CVR 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 15202 |
|
LOE ID: |
26228 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Not Specified |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Fish Migration |
|
Number of Samples: |
13 |
Number of Exceedances: |
13 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Stream temperatures were measured by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) using data loggers (Stowaways, Tidbits and Hobo Temp Pros). Monitoring occurred from 2001 to 2005 depending on the monitoring station, identified by a river mile. The 7DADM was recorded weekly for each river mile. The maximum 7DADM value was calculated for each year. Based on the data provided, 13 out of 13 maximum 7DADM values exceeded the <20 degrees C criteria from 2001 to 2005. |
Data Reference: |
Cover letter, data and information regarding elevated water temperatures in the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers |
|
Access and DSS database files of water temperature data, one each for the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected. (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives) |
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 guideline used was the 2003 US EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards (USEPA, 2003). The document includes recommended temperature criteria for salmon and trout based on different life stages. The recommended temperature for salmon and trout adult migration is <20 degrees C for a 7DADM. The adult migration life stage occurs from river mile 71 (Durham Ferry) to river mile 74.5 (above Two Rivers). This life stage occurs during Julian weeks 36 through 43, which is approximately September 1st through October 31st. |
Guideline Reference: |
EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards. EPA 910-B-03-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Office of Water, Seattle, WA. |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The adult migration life stage occurs from river mile 71 (Durham Ferry) to river mile 74.5 (above Two Rivers). Stream temperatures were monitored at the following stream locations during the adult migration life stage: River Miles 71 (Durham Ferry), 73.5 (1/2 mile below the Stanislaus River confluence), 74 (above Two Rivers) and 74.5 (above Two Rivers). |
Temporal Representation: |
The adult migration life stage occurs during Julian weeks 36 through 43, which is approximately September 1st through October 31st. Data was collected during this life stage on a continuous basis (hourly intervals) from 2001 through 2005, depending on the station and year monitored. Refer to the California Department of Fish and Game 2007 report (Gordus, 2007) for specific years for each location. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data is supported by a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 31.45 and are acceptable for use in developing the section 303(d) list. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
26519 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Not Specified |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
Aquatic Life Use: |
Fish Migration |
|
Number of Samples: |
0 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
QUALITATIVE (EVALUATED) ASSESSMENT - UNSPECIFIED |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The San Joaquin watershed had a large spring-run of chinook salmon, along with a much smaller fall-run (Hatton and Clark, 1942). By about 1920, chinook salmon populations declined due to changes within the upper San Joaquin watershed. Many changes such as dams, water diversion, mining and harvest have been suggested for their decline. By 1950s salmon became extinct in the mainstem San Joaquin River and populations of less than 500 were a common occurrence in the Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers.
However, the gradual decline in salmon populations has been tied to the unsuitable high water temperatures, which increases juveniles susceptibility to disease, predation and accumulation of contaminants (Myrick and Cech 2001). Since 1952 there have been several peak escapement trends, but overall, the trend over time to 2006 has been declining dramatically with the 1952 peak of over 8,000 salmon to 1,000 salmon in 2006.
Steelhead, described by Latta (1929, 1949) and other authors write about good numbers and casually being taken by indigeneous peoples. Now the runs are extinct in the mainstem and are listed as a Federally Threatened species. |
Data Reference: |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected. (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives) |
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: |
In the absence of necessary data to interpret numeric water quality objectives, recent temperature monitoring data shall be compared to the temperature requirements of aquatic life in the water segment. In many cases, fisheries, particularly salmonids, represent the beneficial uses most sensitive to temperature. Information on current and historic conditions and distribution of sensitive beneficial uses (e.g., fishery resources) in the water segment is necessary, as well as recent temperature data reflective of conditions experienced by the most sensitive life stage of the aquatic life species. If temperature data from past (historic) periods corresponding to times when the beneficial use was fully supported are not available, information about presence/absence or abundance of sensitive aquatic life species shall be used to infer past (historic) temperature conditions if loss of habitat, diversions, toxic spills, and other factors are also considered (SWRCB, 2004). |
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
San Joaquin River |
Temporal Representation: |
Information referenced from year 1920 through 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
San Joaquin Fall-Run Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Rainbow Trout Historical Population Trend Summary. Dean Marston. September 2007. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
26518 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Not Specified |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Fish Migration |
|
Number of Samples: |
7 |
Number of Exceedances: |
5 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Stream temperatures were measured by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) using data loggers (Stowaways, Tidbits and Hobo Temp Pros). Monitoring occurred from 2002 to 2005 depending on the monitoring station, identified by a river mile. The 7DADM was recorded weekly for each river mile. The maximum 7DADM value was calculated for each year. Based on the data provided, 5 out of 7 maximum 7DADM values exceeded the <20oC criteria from 2002 to 2005. |
Data Reference: |
Cover letter, data and information regarding elevated water temperatures in the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers |
|
Access and DSS database files of water temperature data, one each for the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected. (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives) |
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 guideline used was the 2003 US EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards (USEPA, 2003). The document includes recommended temperature criteria for salmon and trout based on different life stages. The recommended temperature for salmon and trout migration is <20oC for a 7DADM. The adult migration life stage occurs from river mile 71 (Durham Ferry) to river mile 74 (above Two Rivers). This life stage occurs during Julian weeks 11 through 24, which is approximately March 15th through June 15th. |
Guideline Reference: |
EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards. EPA 910-B-03-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Office of Water, Seattle, WA. |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The migration life stage occurs from river mile 71 (Durham Ferry) to river mile 74 (above Two Rivers). Stream temperatures were monitored at the following stream locations during the migration life stage: River Miles 71 (Durham Ferry) and 74 (above Two Rivers). |
Temporal Representation: |
The migration life stage occurs from river mile 71 (Durham Ferry) to river mile 74 (above Two Rivers). Data was collected during this life stage on a continuous basis (hourly intervals) from 2002 through 2005, depending on the station and year monitored. Refer to the California Department of Fish and Game 2007 report (Gordus, 2007) for specific years for each location. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Data is supported by a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 31.45 and are acceptable for use in developing the section 303(d) list. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
6736 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDT |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Agriculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2011 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.5 of the Listing Policy. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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 the 3 samples exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy and there are not enough samples to support delisting.
4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
This is a decision made by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the USEPA in 2006 . No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6736 |
|
LOE ID: |
2809 |
|
Pollutant: |
DDT |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Tissue |
Matrix: |
Tissue |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
3 |
Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fish tissue analysis |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Two out of 3 samples exceeded. A total of 3 filet composite samples of 2 largemouth bass and one of white catfish were collected. Largemouth bass were collected in 1998 and 2000. White catfish were collected in 1998. The guideline was exceeded in the 2000 sample of largemouth bass and the 1998 white catfish sample (TSMP, 2002). |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
100 ng/g - OEHHA Screening Value (Brodberg & Pollock, 1999). |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
One station along the San Joaquin River about 4 miles upstream from South County Park near San Joaquin City (Vernalis) was sampled. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected annually 1998 and 2000. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Environmental Chemistry Quality Assurance and Data Report for the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program, 1996-2000. Department of Fish and Game. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
7519 |
|
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 Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
This is a decision made by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the USEPA in 2006 . No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7519 |
|
LOE ID: |
4548 |
|
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): |
|
DECISION ID |
7520 |
|
Pollutant: |
Mercury |
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: |
Resource Extraction |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2012 |
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 7520 |
|
LOE ID: |
4549 |
|
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 |
6737 |
|
Pollutant: |
Toxaphene |
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: |
Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.
This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Three of the 3 samples exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value 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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
This is a decision made by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the USEPA in 2006 . No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6737 |
|
LOE ID: |
2810 |
|
Pollutant: |
Toxaphene |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Tissue |
Matrix: |
Tissue |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
Number of Samples: |
3 |
Number of Exceedances: |
3 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fish tissue analysis |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Three out of 3 samples exceeded. A total of 3 filet composite samples were collected: 2 largemouth bass and one sample of white catfish. Largemouth bass were collected in 1998 and 2000. White catfish were collected in 1998. The guidance was exceeded in all three samples (TSMP, 2002). |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Central Valley RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
30 ng/g - OEHHA Screening Value (Brodberg & Pollock, 1999). |
Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Spatial Representation: |
One stations along the San Joaquin River about 4 miles upstream from South County Park near San Joaquin City (Vernalis) was sampled. |
Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected annually 1998 and 2000. |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Environmental Chemistry Quality Assurance and Data Report for the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program, 1996-2000. Department of Fish and Game. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |