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) |
|
DECISION ID |
11174 |
|
Pollutant: |
Unknown Toxicity |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 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 2 available concentrations for unknown toxicity - P. promelas, exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.1 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 2 has 2 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria for P. promelas. This recommendation is also based on staff findings that 0 of 2 available concentrations for unknown toxicity - C. dubia, exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.1 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 2 has 2 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria for C. dubia.
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: |
|
|
|
|
LOE ID: |
25039 |
|
Pollutant: |
Unknown Toxicity |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
2 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Zero of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Unknown Toxicity-Pimephales promelas. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows |
|
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: |
Statistically significant difference from control using a Fishers Exact analysis with 96-hour acute-style toxicity tests. |
Guideline Reference: |
Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012 |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Highway 49. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Sep 3 2002 to Oct 22 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
25037 |
|
Pollutant: |
Unknown Toxicity |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
2 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Unknown Toxicity-Ceriodaphia dubia. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows |
|
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: |
Statistically significant difference from control using a Fishers Exact analysis with 48-hour acute-style toxicity tests. |
Guideline Reference: |
Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012 |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Highway 49. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Sep 3 2002 to Oct 22 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 |
9887 |
|
Pollutant: |
Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Weight of Evidence: |
"This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 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 6 available concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Cold Freshwater Habitat and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The recommendation is also based on staff findings that 0 of 6 available concentrations exceeded the Department of Public Health Secondary MCL for Municipal & Domestic Supply and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met." |
|
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9887 |
|
LOE ID: |
20988 |
|
Pollutant: |
Zinc |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
6 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
0 of the 6 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Zinc. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows |
|
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: |
Zinc levels should not exceed 5000 ug/L (Department of Public Health Secondary MCL) |
Guideline Reference: |
Compilation of Water Quality Goals |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Gold Beach Park. Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Highway 49. Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Michigan Bar Road. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jun 11 2002 to Jun 25 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): |
|
|
LOE ID: |
7911 |
|
Pollutant: |
Zinc |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
6 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Zero of the 6 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Zinc. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Northeast Basin |
|
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 Cosumnes River at Gold Beach Park. Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Highway 49. Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Michigan Bar Road. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jun 11 2002 to Jun 25 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 |
8908 |
|
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 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 5 of 75 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 75 has 13 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 8908 |
|
LOE ID: |
7904 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
75 |
Number of Exceedances: |
5 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Five of the 75 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for pH. The exceeded results are as follows: 1/22/2002 - a sample taken at Cosumnes River at Gold Beach Park had a result of 6.1none. 2/12/2002 - a sample taken at Cosumnes River at Gold Beach Park had a result of 9none. 1/22/2002 - a sample taken at Cosumnes River at Highway 49 had a result of 6.2none. 2/12/2002 - a sample taken at Cosumnes River at Highway 49 had a result of 8.9none. 2/12/2002 - a sample taken at Cosumnes River at Michigan Bar Road had a result of 8.8none. |
Data Reference: |
San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Northeast Basin |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
pH levels should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5 (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 Cosumnes River at Gold Beach Park. Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Highway 49. Samples were collected at Cosumnes River at Michigan Bar Road. |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected from Jan 8 2002 to Dec 23 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 |
16126 |
|
Pollutant: |
Invasive Species |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
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 3.10 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.10 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Over a three-year period, this study strongly indicated that non-native presence was responsible for sharp native species abundance declines in the Cosumnes River basin.
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. This study was conducted from 1999-2001.
2. Trends analysis was examined using Pearson Correlation Coefficients between abundances of fish species at forty-four sampling sites.
3. Where non-native fish species were present, native fish species abundance was low or non-existent. Natives had been extirpated from many sites.
4. Some native species distribution overlapped with non-natives, highly suggesting that predation by non-natives was responsible for native abundance declines. This model supports the overall pattern of gradual disappearance of native fishes from the Cosumnes basin.
5. It cannot be determined if the trend in water quality is expected to meet water standards by the next listing cycle.
6. 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: |
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. |
|
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
|
USEPA Decision: |
|
|
|
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16126 |
|
LOE ID: |
26644 |
|
Pollutant: |
Invasive Species |
LOE Subgroup: |
Population/Community Degradation |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
25 |
Number of Exceedances: |
18 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fish surveys |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The species assessed in support of this listing are green sunfish and redeye bass. Of the 25 species captured during the study, 18 were alien species. The most widely distributed alien species was redeye bass (at 31 sites). Only 7 of 11 native species expected were collected. Rainbow trout was the only native species that occupied much of its native range in headwater streams protected from invasion of non-natives due to downstream barriers. Native species, hardhead and speckled dace appear to have been extirpated from the watershed in recent years. Redeye bass and green sunfish now occupy most of the suitable habitat for both species. Predation by redeye bass appears to be responsible for the decline in numbers of the Sacramento pikeminnow. It appears that predation by certain alien species, such as redeye bass, has caused the elimination or reduction of native fishes from permanent pools in the lower reaches of the Cosumnes River. Non-native species were found primarily in low-land habitats on the valley floor of the foothills. Where non-native fish species were present, native fish species abundance was low or non-existent. Trends analysis was examined using Pearson Correlation Coefficients between abundances of fish species at forty-four sites (Moyle, P.B. et al. 2003). |
Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
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. Compliance with this objective will be determined by analyses of indicator organisms, species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, and biotoxicity tests of appropriate duration or other methods as specified by the Regional Water Board (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Page III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives.) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
In July, August and September of 1999-2001, this study sampled a total of 44 sites throughout the Cosumnes River watershed. Twenty-four of the sites were sampled once in the 3-year period, 14 sites were sampled twice, and 8 sites were sampled all 3 years. At each site, 50 to 100m of stream for fish were sampled. The data assessed shows that the entire watershed is impaired with exotic species. The entire Cosumnes River watershed, including the north, middle and south forks of the upper watershed are being mapped as impaired. |
Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred in July, August and September of 1999, 2000 and 2001. Twenty-four sites were sampled once in the 3 year period, 14 sites were sampled twice and 8 were sampled all 3 years. |
Environmental Conditions: |
Changes in relative diversity and abundance of native species may also be driven by habitat alteration, flow changes, or hydromodification. |
QAPP Information: |
Peer Reviewed Journal Article and Reports. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |