# Final 2008 California 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report

# Supporting Information

## Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name: | Harding Drain
Water Body ID: | CAR5355000019980813181351
Water Body Type: | River & Stream

DECISION ID | 5238
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
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 | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2008
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. Three of 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 removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of 72 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion within a three-year period and, according to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, this water body segment should no be delisted from the 303(d) list. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 5238

LOE ID: | 28225
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 64
Number of Exceedances: | 3
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Sixty-four samples were collected from Harding Draing by Turlock Irrigation District from May 2006 through July 2008, representing sixty-four 4-day average concentrations. Three of 64 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Comments on the Proposed Revisions to the 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies for the Central Valley Region
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day 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 HD1 (Harding Drain 0.5 miles downstream of City of Turlock's WWTP) and HD2 (Harding Drain at Carpenter Road).
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from May 2006 through July 2008.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with a Quality Assurance Project Plan for a State Water Resources Control Board Proposition 50 grant.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides
LOE ID: | 2749
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: | 319
Number of Exceedances: | 36
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirty-six out of 319 samples exceeded the water quality guideline (Turlock Irrigation District, 2006). Data was collected by Turlock Irrigation District (TID), USGS/NAWQA, DPR, and City of Turlock.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The narrative pesticide objectives state, in part: -No individual pesticides or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses, -Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses, Pesticide concentrations shall not exceed those allowable by applicable antidegredation policies, and waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline: | Department of Fish and Game guideline of 0.014 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at three sites: CMD32Hodges, HD1, and HD2.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected by TID, from 9/12/01-8/25/04, by USGS/NAWQA from 4/22/92-8/2/01, by DPR from 3/4/91-2/9/93, and by the City of Turlock from 2/17/01-5/23/05.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | TID Sampling and Analysis Plan.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 2748
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Testimonial Evidence
Matrix: | -N/A
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: |
Number of Exceedances: |
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Letter submitted on behalf of Turlock Irrigation District requesting Harding Drain to be delisted for chlorpyrifos due to a UAA that was completed.
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: | 22471
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 8
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 11 Water samples were collected from Harding Draing from January 2000 through August 2001, representing 8 4-day average concentrations and 11 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 8 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 11 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 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 Harding Drain at Carpenter Road Near Patterson California_USGS NAWQA site.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (e.g. weekly, daily) from January 2000 to August 2001.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides

DECISION ID | 4427
Pollutant: | Unknown Toxicity
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 | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. None of 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 removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 77 samples (2001 through 2008) exceeded the toxicity objective for invertebrate toxicity and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, None of 75 samples (2001 through 2008) exceeded the toxicity objective for vertebrate and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. However, no data was submitted to re-evaluate the historical listing for algal toxicity (9 out of 15 samples tested with Selenastrum were toxic from 1988 through 1990). This listing currently only applies to algal toxicity. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4427

LOE ID: | 2743
Pollutant: | Unknown Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Testimonial Evidence
Matrix: | -N/A
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: |
Number of Exceedances: |
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Letter submitted on behalf of Turlock Irrigation District requesting Harding Drain to be delisted for unknown toxicity due to a UAA that was completed.
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: | 28223
Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 50
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 50 samples collected by the Turlock Irrgation District exceeded the evaluation guideline for Unknown Toxicity-Pimephales promelas.
Data Reference: | Comments on the Proposed Revisions to the 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies for the Central Valley Region
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (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 HD1 (Harding Drain 0.5 miles downstream of City of Turlock's WWTP) and HD2 (Harding Drain at Carpenter Road).
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected monthly from May 2006 to May 2008.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with a Quality Assurance Project Plan for a State Water Resources Control Board Proposition 50 grant.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 28221
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 52
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 52 samples collected by the Turlock Irrigation District exceeded the evaluation guideline for Unknown Toxicity-Ceriodaphia dubia.
Data Reference: | Comments on the Proposed Revisions to the 303(d) List of Impaired Water Bodies for the Central Valley Region
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (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 HD1 (Harding Drain 0.5 miles downstream of City of Turlock's WWTP) and HD2 (Harding Drain at Carpenter Road).
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected monthly from May 2006 to May 2008.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with a Quality Assurance Project Plan for a State Water Resources Control Board Proposition 50 grant.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 25075
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 25
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 25 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Unknown Toxicity-Ceriodaphia dubia.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
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 Harding Drain at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from June 2001 to November 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):
LOE ID: | 25074
Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 25
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 25 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Unknown Toxicity-Pimephales promelas.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
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 Harding Drain at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from October 2000 to November 2005.
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 | 9304
Pollutant: | Cadmium
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | "This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 11 available concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Warm Freshwater Habitat 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 9304

LOE ID: | 8737
Pollutant: | Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 11
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 11 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR criterion for dissolved cadmium
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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))
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 from TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between September 26, 2001 and November 20, 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 | 9305
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 20 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 9305

LOE ID: | 8739
Pollutant: | Copper
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 20
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 20 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Copper.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
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 TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from October 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 | 9306
Pollutant: | Lead
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | "This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 21 available concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Warm Freshwater Habitat 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 9306

LOE ID: | 8743
Pollutant: | Lead
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 21
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 21 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved lead
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved lead levels should not exceed the calculated CTR 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))
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 from TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between October 26, 2000 and November 20, 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 | 9308
Pollutant: | Nickel
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | "This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 21 available concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Warm Freshwater Habitat 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 9308

LOE ID: | 8747
Pollutant: | Nickel
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 21
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 21 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved nickel
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved nickel levels should not exceed the calculated CTR limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour Average, dissolved)=(EXP(0.846*LN(hardness)+2.255))*(0.998)
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 from TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between October 26, 2000, and November 20, 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 | 9312
Pollutant: | Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 14 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.1 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 14 has 2 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 9312

LOE ID: | 8748
Pollutant: | Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 14
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 14 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nitrate-N.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
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 The Blue Book
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Oct 24 2001
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 | 9313
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 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 59 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 9313

LOE ID: | 8740
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 59
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 59 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Dissolved Oxygen.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan Objective sets the minimum Dissolved Oxygen content at 5 mg/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 at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jun 5 2001 to Jun 30 2005
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 | 14512
Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 one line(s) of evidence are 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 1 samples exceeded the narrative toxicity objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 2 samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
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 14512

LOE ID: | 22496
Pollutant: | Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Sediment
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The one sample tested with Hyalella azteca was toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. One sample collected at Carpenter Road exhibited a statistically significant decrease in survival compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:8 April 2003 (64)
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. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CVRWQCB, 2007)
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 10-day Hyalella azteca sediment toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from Harding Drain at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in April 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. 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 | 9314
Pollutant: | Selenium
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that only 1 sample is available and a minimum of 2 is needed for evaluation under section 3.1. 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9314

LOE ID: | 8751
Pollutant: | Selenium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 1 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Selenium.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CRWQCB, 2006) Selenium levels should not to exceed 5 ug/L (CTR)
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Oct 30 2002 to Oct 30 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 | 14513
Pollutant: | Trebufos
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 36 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 14513

LOE ID: | 23398
Pollutant: | Trebufos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 36
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 36 water samples were collected from Harding Drain at Carpenter Road from April 1992 through October 2001 representing 36 concentrations. One of the 36 samples had a concentration that exceeded 0.02 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). For most pesticides, numerical water quality objectives have not been adopted. USEPA criteria and other guidance are also extremely limited. Since this situation is not likely to change in the near future, the Board will use the best available technical information to evaluate compliance with the narrative objectives. Where valid testing has developed 96 hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms (the concentration that kills one half of the test organisms in 96 hours), the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life. Other available technical information on the pesticide (such as Lowest Observed Effect Concentrations and No Observed Effect Levels), the water bodies and the organisms involved will be evaluated to determine if lower concentrations are required to meet the narrative 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 96 hour LC50 for the most sensitive species, Gammarus pseudolimnaeus, was 0.2 ug/L (USEPA Ecotox database, 2008). One tenth of this LC50, 0.02 ug/L, is the daily maximum concentration.
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
| Ecotoxicity database. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from Harding Drain at Carpenter Road, near Patterson, CA.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (biweekly, weekly, monthly) from April 1992 through August 2001.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 9309
Pollutant: | Zinc
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | "This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 20 available concentrations exceeded the California Toxics Rule for Warm Freshwater Habitat 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 9309

LOE ID: | 8753
Pollutant: | Zinc
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 20
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 20 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved zinc
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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)
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 from TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from October 26, 2000, to November 20, 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 | 9315
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 0 of 71 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 71 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 9315

LOE ID: | 8741
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 71
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 71 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for pH.
Data Reference: | SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database
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 TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Oct 26 2000 to Jun 30 2005
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 | 12913
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One 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 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. Five of 35 samples exceed the 0.00059 μg/L California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk level for consumption of water and aquatic organisms for DDE 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 12913

LOE ID: | 22472
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 35
Number of Exceedances: | 5
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirty-five water samples were taken from Harding Drain between April of 1992 and August of 2001. Five of the available five samples exceed the 0.00059 ug/L California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk for consumption of water and aquatic organisms for DDE (4,4-DDE).
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 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).
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 Harding Drain at Carpenter Rd. near Patterson, California.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from June of 1994 through August of 2001. Samples were collected at weekly intervals.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 8648
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 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 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. Thirty 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. Thirty of 37 samples exceed the E. Coli objective for Water Contact Recreation and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Seventeen of 37 samples exceed the E. Coli objective for Non-Contact Water Recreation 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 8648

LOE ID: | 7533
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 37
Number of Exceedances: | 30
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirty of the 37 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for E.Coli Bacteria. The exceeded results are as follows: 10/15/2002 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 328MPN. 1/14/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 488MPN. 1/22/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 261MPN. 2/4/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 238MPN. 2/20/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 461MPN. 3/6/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 435MPN. 4/3/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 435MPN. 5/8/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1120MPN. 6/5/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 649MPN. 6/19/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 345MPN. 6/30/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 291MPN. 7/31/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 365MPN. 8/7/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 517MPN. 8/21/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1203MPN. 8/28/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1300MPN. 9/11/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 866MPN. 9/25/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 980MPN. 10/23/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 411MPN. 11/6/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 345MPN. 1/8/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 816MPN. 8/26/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 285MPN. 9/30/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 238MPN. 11/23/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1203MPN. 12/29/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of >2419.6MPN. 1/27/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 361MPN. 2/24/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of >2419.6MPN. 3/29/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 365MPN. 4/28/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 387MPN. 5/26/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1553MPN. 6/30/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 248MPN.
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: | E.Coli Bacteria levels should not exceed 235 MPN/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA E.Coli Guideline)
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jul 30 2002 to Jun 30 2005
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: | 7560
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 37
Number of Exceedances: | 17
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Seventeen of the 37 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for E.Coli Bacteria. The exceeded results are as follows: 1/14/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 488MPN. 2/20/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 461MPN. 3/6/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 435MPN. 4/3/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 435MPN. 5/8/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1120MPN. 6/5/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 649MPN. 8/7/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 517MPN. 8/21/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1203MPN. 8/28/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1300MPN. 9/11/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 866MPN. 9/25/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 980MPN. 10/23/2003 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 411MPN. 1/8/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 816MPN. 11/23/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1203MPN. 12/29/2004 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of >2419.6MPN. 2/24/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of >2419.6MPN. 5/26/2005 - a sample taken at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road had a result of 1553MPN.
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: | E.Coli Bacteria levels should not exceed 409 MPN/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA E.Coli Guideline)
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at TID Lateral 5 at Carpenter Road.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jul 30 2002 to Jun 30 2005
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 | 12908
Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification 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. Four of 11 samples exceed the minimum criterion Water Quality Objectives Hexachlorobenzene listed by the US EPA for Sources of Drinking Water (water and fish consumption) 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 12908

LOE ID: | 22485
Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 11
Number of Exceedances: | 4
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Eleven samples were taken from the Harding Drain between 2000 and 2001. Four of the eleven samples exceed USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) for maximum Hexachlorobenzene content in surface water with a limit of < 0.00075 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: | California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000) - Sources of Drinking Water (water & fish consumption) with a limit of < 0.00075 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 Harding Drain at Carpenter Rd Nr Patterson, CA USGS NAWQA site in Stanislaus County.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between January 2000 and August 2001. Samples were collected at monthly intervals.
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 | 13241
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
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. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Nineteen 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. Nineteen of the available twenty-five 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 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 13241

LOE ID: | 22482
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 25
Number of Exceedances: | 19
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirty-six water samples water samples were collected from Harding Drain from January 2000 through August 2001. Eleven of the thirty-six water samples had high Reporting Limits and data could not be used in the analysis according to the Listing Policy Section 6.5.1.1, as a consequence, twenty-five water samples were used in the analysis. Nineteen of the available twenty-five water samples exceeded the CTR criteria of 0.019 mg/g for human consumption of water and organisms.
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | - Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB. 2007a) Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer. - California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000) based on criteria for human consumption of water and organisms with a 10-6 risk for carcinogens of 0.019 mg/g.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from Harding Drain near Patterson in California.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at irregular intervals between January 2000 and August 2001.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | 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 | 12920
Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH)
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. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Twenty-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 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-three of 23 samples exceed the minimum criterion Water Quality Objectives for Alpha-HCH listed under the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria 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 12920

LOE ID: | 22484
Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 23
Number of Exceedances: | 23
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | - Twenty-three samples were taken from the Harding Drain between 1992 and 2001. Twenty-three of the twenty-three samples exceed the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria for minimum Alpha-HCH in surface water of <0.0026 g/L. - There were fourteen samples with data that was not usable because they had high Reporting Limits (Lisitng Policy, SWRCB, 2004).
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Guideline <0.0026 g/L.
Guideline Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Harding Drain at Carpenter Road near Patterson in Stanislaus County.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between April 1992 and August 2001. 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 | 4950
Pollutant: | Ammonia
Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status | Original
Reason for Delisting: | State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 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. Not enough samples exceeded the water quality objectives. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 4. Two of 115 samples exceeded the 30-day CCC, 3 of 327 samples exceeded the 4-day average CCC and none of 327 samples exceeded the 1-hour average CMC and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | 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 4950

LOE ID: | 2745
Pollutant: | Ammonia
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: | 115
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of 115 samples exceeded the thirty-day CCC (chronic criterion). Three of 327 samples exceed the four-day CCC. None of 327 samples exceed the one-hour average CMC (acute criterion) (Turlock Irrigation District, 2006).
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan narrative water quality objective for toxicity states that all waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA 1999 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia.
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at 3 sites: CMD32Hodges, HD1, and HD2.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from September 2001 to August 2004.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Turlock Irrigation District Sampling and Analysis Plan.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 2744
Pollutant: | Ammonia
LOE Subgroup: | Testimonial Evidence
Matrix: | -N/A
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Letter submitted on behalf of Turlock Irrigation District requesting Harding Drain to be delisted for ammonia due to a UAA that was completed.
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):