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

# Supporting Information

## Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name: | Mokelumne River, Upper
Water Body ID: | CAR5326009020000208160319
Water Body Type: | River & Stream

DECISION ID | 10193
Pollutant: | Arsenic
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | "This pollutant is being considered for 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 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 2 available concentrations exceeded the USEPA Primary 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 10193

LOE ID: | 20556
Pollutant: | Arsenic
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Neither of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the USEPA Primary MCL of 10 ug/L for total arsenic
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Total arsenic levels must not exceed the USEPA Primary MCL of 10 ug/L
Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Mokelumne River at Hwy 49
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on June 13, 2002 and June 26, 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: | 6380
Pollutant: | Arsenic
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Neither of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the CTR criterion of 340 ug/L for dissolved arsenic
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved arsenic levels should not exceed the CTR 1-hour average maximum concentration of 340 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
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Mokelumne River at Hwy 49 and at Hwy 50
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on June 13, 2002 and June 26, 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 | 10194
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 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 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 2 available concentrations exceeded the Department of Public Health Primary 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 10194

LOE ID: | 20593
Pollutant: | Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Neither of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the California Primary MCL of 5 ug/L for total cadmium
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Total cadmium levels should not exceed the California Department of Public Health Primary MCL of 5 ug/L
Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Mokelumne River at Highway 49
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on June 13, 2002 and June 26, 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: | 6382
Pollutant: | Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Neither of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR criterion for dissolved cadmium
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved cadmium levels should not exceed the calculated limit based on the formula: Criteria Maximum Concentration (1-hour average, total)=(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 the Mokelumne River at Highway 49
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on June 13, 2002 and June 26, 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 | 10195
Pollutant: | Chromium (total)
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 2 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10195

LOE ID: | 20588
Pollutant: | Chromium (total)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
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 objective for Chromium.
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: | Chromium levels should not exceed 50 ug/L (Department of Public Health Primary MCL).
Guideline Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from June 2002 to June 26 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 | 10196
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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None 0 of 2 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. In addition, 0 of 2 available concentrations exceeded the Department of Public Health Primary MCL for Municipal & Domestic Supply and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using 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 10196

LOE ID: | 6384
Pollutant: | Copper
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
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 objective for Copper.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
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 Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jun 13 2002 to Jun 26 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: | 20660
Pollutant: | Copper
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Copper.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Copper levels should not exceed 1300 ug/L (Department of Public Health Primary MCL).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from June 13, 2002 to June 26, 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 | 13742
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Sixteen 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. Sixteen of 455 samples exceeded the fecal coliform objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
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 13742

LOE ID: | 22877
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 455
Number of Exceedances: | 16
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Historical Water Quality Results for Analytical Laboratory Measurements 590 PG&E Company Mokelumne River Project (FERC 137, PG&E, 2003) collected 455 samples from July 2000 to January 2004. Sixteen out of 455 samples exceeded evaluation objective.
Data Reference: | Mokelumne River Project (FERC 137) and Mokelumne Watershed correspondence and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | The fecal coliform concentration of 400/100ml based on the geometric mean each month.
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
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at nine locations, as specified in Historical Water Quality Results for Analytical Laboratory Measurements 590 PG&E Company Mokelumne River Project.
Temporal Representation: | Sampling occurred from July 2000 to January 2007.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Well documented QA/QC including report on Certified Analytical Reports and chain-of-custody documentation.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10198
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 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 exceeded the USEPA Primary MCL and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 2 available concentrations exceeded the USEPA National Ambient Water Quality Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10198

LOE ID: | 6388
Pollutant: | Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 2 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nitrate-N.
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: | 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 Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jun 13 2002 to Jun 26 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: | 20755
Pollutant: | Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
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 objective for Nitrate-N.
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: | Nitrate-N levels should not exceed 45 mg/L (Department of Public Health Primary MCL)
Guideline Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jun 13 2002 to Jun 26 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 | 10199
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 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 only 1 sample is available and a minimum of 2 samples is needed for evaluation under section 3.1 for the Municipal Beneficial Use and for the Cold Water Habitat. 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 10199

LOE ID: | 6943
Pollutant: | Selenium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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: | 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) 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 Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Oct 24 2002 to Oct 24 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: | 20291
Pollutant: | Selenium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 1 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Selenium.
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: | Selenium levels should not exceed 50 ug/L (Department of Public Health Primary MCL)
Guideline Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Oct 24 2002 to Oct 24 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 | 7884
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity
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 25 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 25 has 5 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria.
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 7884

LOE ID: | 20837
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 25
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 25 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the "recommended" Secondary MCL of 900 uS/cm for electrical conductivity
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The secondary MCLs for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a "recommended" level (900 uS/cm), upper level (1600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2200 uS/cm). The recommended concentration was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water uses
Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Lawbook.aspx
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Mokelumne River at Hwy 49
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between January 9, 2002 and December 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 | 11209
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 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 2 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 2 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 11209

LOE ID: | 25061
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: | Not Specified
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-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 Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Sep 5 2002 to Oct 24 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 | 7881
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 25 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 25 has 5 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 7881

LOE ID: | 6385
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 25
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 25 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for pH.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Drainage Basin Inflows
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 Mokelumne River at Hwy 49.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jan 9 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 | 6896
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status | Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. All four samples exceed the water quality criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient 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 does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Out of all four annual maximum values, all four were in exceedance of the 21.0°C steelhead annual maximum criterion. However the number of samples is in sufficient to determine if the water quality objective is being met or exceeded. More data is needed to determine if the water quality objective is exceeded. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | This is a decision made by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the USEPA in 2006 . No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for 2008. The decision has not changed.
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6896

LOE ID: | 2735
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 4
Number of Exceedances: | 4
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Temperature measurements were taken at 1 monitoring station (MR1) along the Mokelumne River. For this station there were a total of 4 annual maximum temperature values, one for each sampling year, 2000 to 2003. Based on this data, there were a total of 4 annual maximum measurements of which all 4 were in exceedance of the 21.0 degrees C steelhead criteria (PG&E, 2003b).
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. - Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Boards Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline: | The guideline used was from Sullivan et al. (2000) Published Temperature Thresholds-Peer Reviewed Literature which includes reviewed sub-lethal and acute temperature thresholds from a wide range of studies, incorporating information from laboratory-based research, field observations, and risk assessment approaches. This report calculated the Annual Maximum (instantaneous maximum observed during the summer) upper threshold criterion for steelhead trout as 21.0 degrees C. The risk assessment approach used by Sullivan et al. (2000) suggests that an upper threshold for the Annual Maximum of 21.0 degrees C for steelhead will reduce average growth 10% from optimum.
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation: | The monitoring station (MR1) was located along the Mokelumne River just upstream of the Electra Powerhouse and downstream of the Ponderosa Bridge.
Temporal Representation: | Temperature measurements were taken during years 2000 to 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | QA/QC including 174 page report on Certified Analytical Reports and Chain-of-Custody Documentation.
QAPP Information Reference(s):