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

# Supporting Information

## Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name: | San Joaquin River ( Merced River to Tuolumne River)
Water Body ID: | CAR5440000020021002100850
Water Body Type: | River & Stream

DECISION ID | 8139
Pollutant: | Selenium
Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Reason for Delisting: | State determines water quality standard is being met
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | (DELIST - TOXICANT POLLUTANT) 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. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Thirteen of samples exceeded the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for 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. Thirteen of 699 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8139

LOE ID: | 6947
Pollutant: | Selenium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 699
Number of Exceedances: | 13
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirteen of the 699 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Selenium.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CRWQCB, 2006) Selenium levels should not to exceed 5 ug/L (CTR)
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at SJR @ Crows Landing. Samples were collected at SJR @ Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jan 4 2001 to Sep 27 2007
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 6583
Pollutant: | Diazinon
Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status | Revised
Reason for Delisting: | State determines water quality standard is being met
TMDL Name: | San Joaquin River Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos
TMDL Project Code: | 209
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 01/01/2007
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. Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of samples exceeded the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for 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 127 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion and this does not exceed the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion more than once every three years. In addition, 0 of 159 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average concentration criterion and this does not exceed the 1-hour average concentration criterion more than once every three years. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6583

LOE ID: | 22692
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 42
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 45 Water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from April through August 2001, representing 42 4-day average concentrations and 45 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 42 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L. 0 of 45 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 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 Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at three locations: Crows Landing, Laird Park, and below WSID pump above Tuolumne R near Westley.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly from April through August 2001.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides
LOE ID: | 22752
Pollutant: | Diazinon
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 San Joaquin River from February through August 2006, 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 0.1 ug/L. 0 of 11 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at daily and biweekly intervals from February through August 2006.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22751
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 7
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 7 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from March through August 2005, representing 7 4-day average concentrations and 7 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 7 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L. 0 of 7 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly interval from March through August 2005.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22750
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 3
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 7 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January through March 2005, representing 3 4-day average concentrations and 7 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 3 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L. 0 of 7 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected daily during one storm in January 2005 and biweekly in March 2005.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22749
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 10 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2004, representing 10 4-day average concentrations and 10 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 10 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.10 ug/L. 0 of 10 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly interval in March, July, and August 2004.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22693
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 32
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 42 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January 2000 through August 2001, representing 32 4-day average concentrations and 42 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 32 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.10 ug/L.0 of 42 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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 Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
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: | The water samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (e.g. daily, weekly) in 2001, but only one sample was taken in January 2000.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 22738
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 19
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 19 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from March to August 2003, representing 19 4-day average concentrations and 19 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 19 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L. 0 of 19 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (biweekly and weekly) from March through August 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22737
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 6
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 18 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January to March 2003, representing 6 4-day average concentrations and 18 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 6 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L. 0 of 18 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected twice per day during two storms in February and March 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 2805
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Not Recorded
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Objective/Criterion Reference:
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: |
Temporal Representation: |
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 6243
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture
TMDL Name: | San Joaquin River Salt and Boron
TMDL Project Code: | 66
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 02/08/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Five hundred and fifty-eight 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. Five hundred and fifty-eight of 880 samples exceeded the water quality objective for electrical conductivity and these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 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 6243

LOE ID: | 22866
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 317
Number of Exceedances: | 217
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two thousand one hundred and thirty-four samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 2000 and 2006 yielding 317 weekly averages. Of the 317 weeks, 217 weeks exceeded the California Secondary MCL for Municipal Water Quality Objectives for maximum electrical conductivity in surface water.
Data Reference: | California Data Exchange Center (CDEC), Historical(CSV Format) Electrical Conductivity Data for Mainstem San Joaquin River Stations Sacramento, California
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The water quality objective used was the California Secondary MCL recommended level of 900 uS/cm. The Basin Plan includes chemical constituent water quality objectives that include (by reference) secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) protective of MUN (CVRWQCB, 2007a).The secondary MCL's 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. Though individual listing evaluations did not look at the water supply source serving the given geographic area, there are certain areas that receive supply waters (such as the Delta Mendota Canal) that at times may be elevated above the recommended level of the secondary MCL. Where future information is made available to document this to be the case, these water bodies may be re-evaluated in future listing cycles.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River nr. Patterson, in San Joaquin County, CA.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between November 2000 and December 2006 and are mean daily values averaged weekly for analysis with BinomBal as required by the listing policy (SWRCB, 2004, Section 6.1.5.6 p. 24).
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. SWRCB. 2002. Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of Californias Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Sacramento, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 22639
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 563
Number of Exceedances: | 341
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Five hundred and sixty-three weekly averages were analyzed from the San Joaquin River between 2000 and 2006. Of the 563 averages, 341 exceeded the California Secondary MCL for Municipal Water Quality Objectives for maximum electrical conductivity in surface water.
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The water quality objective used was the California Secondary MCL recommended level of 900 uS/cm. The Basin Plan includes chemical constituent water quality objectives that include (by reference) secondary maximum contaminant levels (MCL's) protective of MUN (CVRWQCB, 2007a).The secondary MCL's 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. Though individual listing evaluations did not look at the water supply source serving the given geographic area, there are certain areas that receive supply waters (such as the Delta Mendota Canal) that at times may be elevated above the recommended level of the secondary MCL. Where future information is made available to document this to be the case, these water bodies may be re-evaluated in future listing cycles.
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
| 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 San Joaquin River nr. Crows Landing, in Stanislaus County, CA.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between January 1996 and December 2006. Original data were mean daily values derived from continuous EC (SC) recorders. Daily Means were averaged to 563 weekly means for analysis with BinomBal as required by the listing policy (SWRCB, 2004, Section 6.1.5.6 p. 24).
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 2807
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: |
Number of Exceedances: |
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Objective/Criterion Reference:
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: |
Temporal Representation: |
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7015
Pollutant: | Unknown Toxicity
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Source Unknown
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. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. Twenty-one 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. Two of 23 samples tested with selenastrum exceeded the narrative toxicity objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, 19 of 38 samples tested with fathead minnow (7-day chronic toxicity test) exceeded the narrative toxicity objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 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 7015

LOE ID: | 4543
Pollutant: | Unknown Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Not Recorded
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Objective/Criterion Reference:
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Unspecified
Temporal Representation: | Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified
QAPP Information: | Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 22676
Pollutant: | Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 38
Number of Exceedances: | 19
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 19 of the 38 samples tested with Pimephales promelas were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. Thirteen samples collected at Crows Landing exhibited a statistically significant decrease in survival compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:11 March 2004 (81)15 April 2004 (65)29 April 2004 (33)18 November 2004 (88)22 December 2004 (80)19 May 2005 (83)22 September 2005 (84)17 November 2005 (69)26 January 2006 (58)23 February 2006 (75)23 March 2006 (70)18 May 2006 (50)20 July 2006 (85)Six samples collected at Patterson exhibited a statistically significant decrease in survival compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:18 November 2004 (86)19 May 2005 (78)20 October 2005 (83)23 March 2006 (87)18 May 2006 (83)20 July 2006 (59)
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 Fisher's Exact test with 7-day chronic-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: | Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-013
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and Patterson
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from March 2004 - July 2006
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)
LOE ID: | 22677
Pollutant: | Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 23
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of 23 samples tested with Selenastrum capricornutum were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. One sample collected at Crows Landing exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:18 May 2006 (83)One sample collected at Patterson exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:18 May 2006 (80)
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 4-day chronic-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: | Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-013
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from November 2004 - July 2006
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)
LOE ID: | 22675
Pollutant: | Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 18 samples tested with Pimephales promelas were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective.
Data Reference: | Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. 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 Fisher's Exact test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from October 2000 - November 2002
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)
LOE ID: | 22674
Pollutant: | Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 34
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 34 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective.
Data Reference: | Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. 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 Fisher's Exact test with 6-day acute-style toxicity tests.
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and Patterson
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from March 2004 - July 2006
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)
LOE ID: | 22673
Pollutant: | Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 18 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective.
Data Reference: | Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. 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 Fisher's Exact test 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. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from January 2001 - November 2002
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 | 6088
Pollutant: | Boron
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture
TMDL Name: | San Joaquin River Salt and Boron
TMDL Project Code: | 66
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 02/08/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 and 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under 4.1 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard.. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section NUMBER of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section NUMBER of the Policy. 3. Eleven out of 150 total samples exceed the September to March monthly mean objective. None out of 1,917 total samples exceed the September to March maximum objective. Seventy-six out of 153 total samples exceed the March to September monthly mean objective. None out of 2,017 total samples exceed the March to September maximum objective. Three out of 12 total samples exceed the critical year objective, which was an insufficient number of samples to determine exceedance. With five water quality objectives applicable the site, exceedance of any of the objectives (using Table 4.1) results in continued listing. In this case, exceedance of March to September monthly mean objective occurred such that there is not sufficient justification to de-list this water segment-pollutant combination. 4. The San Joaquin River at Vernalis Salt and Boron TMDL was approved for this water segment-pollutant combination by USEPA on 02/08/2007 (USEPA, 2007). 5. 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 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: | The USEPA final decision on the 2006 303(d) list was to move this listing to the being addressed by a USEPA approved TMDL portion of the 303(d) list, because the San Joaquin River at Vernalis Salt and Boron TMDL was approved for this water segment-pollutant combination by USEPA on 02/08/2007 (USEPA, 2007).

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6088

LOE ID: | 22863
Pollutant: | Boron
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 74
Number of Exceedances: | 33
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The following is in regards to data collected at the San Joaquin River at Patterson location. From 15 March to 15 September, 33 out of 74 total samples exceeded the monthly mean objective and none out of 271 total samples exceeded the single sample maximum objective. From 16 September to 14 March, 4 out of 75 total samples exceeded the monthly mean objective and none out of 271 total samples exceeded the single sample maximum objective. The following is in regards to data collected at the San Joaquin River at Crows Landing location. From 15 March to 15 September, 41 out of 71 total samples exceeded the monthly mean objective and none out of 1,735 total samples exceeded the single sample maximum objective. From 16 September to 14 March, 7 out of 72 total samples exceeded the monthly mean objective and none out of 1,637 total samples exceeded the single sample maximum objective.
Data Reference: | Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water quality objectives for boron for this reach are contained in the CVRWQCB Basin Plan (2007a, Table III-1, p. III-3.00). For the San Joaquin River from the mouth of the Merced River to Vernalis, from 15 March to 15 September, the boron water quality objective is 2.0 mg/L (max.) and 0.8 mg/L (monthly mean); from 16 September to 14 March the water quality objective is 2.6 mg/L (max.), 1.0 mg/L (monthly mean). During Critical years the water quality objective is 1.3 mg/L (monthly mean only).
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: | Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985)
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson and San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately weekly between October 1995 and June 2006 at San Joaquin River nr. Patterson. Autosampler data were collected daily between October 1995 and May 2006 and grab samples were collected between October 1995 and June 2006 at San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good.. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
LOE ID: | 2808
Pollutant: | Boron
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 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: | 22852
Pollutant: | Boron
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 5
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | From 15 March to 15 September 2003, 2 out of 5 total samples exceeded the monthly mean objective and 0 out of 11 total samples exceeded the single sample maximum objective. From 16 September to 14 March 2003, 0 out of 3 total samples exceeded the monthly mean objective and 0 out of 9 total samples exceeded the single sample maximum objective. The objective specific to critical years was applied in 1994, as it was a critically dry year. Three out of 12 samples exceeded the critical year monthly mean objective.
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For the San Joaquin River near Patterson, from 15 March to 15 September, the Boron water quality objective is 2.0 mg/L (max.) and 0.8 mg/L (monthly mean); from 16 September to 14 March the water quality objective is 2.6 mg/L (max.), 1.0 mg/L (monthly mean), except during Critical Years when the relaxation value is 1.3 mg/L (monthly mean) according to the CVRWQCB Basin Plan (2007a, Table III-1, p. III-3.00).
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: | Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985)
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River near Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately monthly between 21 January 1993 and 27 September 1994.
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 | 6217
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006)
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture
TMDL Name: | San Joaquin River Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos
TMDL Project Code: | 209
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 01/01/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 and 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under [SECTION] of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard.. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section NUMBER of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section NUMBER of the Policy. 3. Seven of 79 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion more than once every three years. In addition, 4 of 112 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average concentration criterion more than once every three years. 4. The San Joaquin River Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos TMDL has been approved by the RWQCB in 2005 and approved by USEPA on December 20, 2006. 5. 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 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 6217

LOE ID: | 2804
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Not Recorded
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Objective/Criterion Reference:
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: |
Temporal Representation: |
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 22715
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 6
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 18 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January to March 2003, representing 6 4-day average concentrations and 18 1-hour average concentrations.2 of 6 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 1 of 18 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour chlorpyrifos concentration of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected daily during two storms in February and March 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22736
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 32
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 45 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January 2000 through August 2001, representing 32 4-day average concentrations and 45 1-hour average concentrations. 1 of 32 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L.2 of 45 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 San Joaquin River at Patterson and Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (daily and weekly) between January 2000 and August 2001.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides
LOE ID: | 22735
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 5
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 5 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River in July and August 2006, representing 5 4-day average concentrations and 5 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 5 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 5 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly in July and August 2006.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22726
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 7
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 7 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2005, representing 7 4-day average concentrations and 7 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 7 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 7 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly in March, July, and August 2005.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22725
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 4 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River in February 2005, representing 1 4-day average concentrations and 4 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 1 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 4 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at daily in two storms in February 2005.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22724
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 15 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2004, representing 10 4-day average concentrations and 15 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 10 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 1 of 15 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly interval in March, July, and August 2004.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22723
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 18 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from March to August 2003, representing 18 4-day average concentrations and 18 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 18 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.015 ug/L. 0 of 18 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.025 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (weekly and biweekly) from March to August 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006

DECISION ID | 7930
Pollutant: | Ammonia
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 68 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 68 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 7930

LOE ID: | 6491
Pollutant: | Ammonia
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 68
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 68 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Ammonia.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CRWQCB, 2006)
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | Ammonia levels should not to exceed the calculated limit. Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection (Salmonid present) Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) (1-hour Average (mg N/L)) calculated based on the following formula: CMC = (0.275/(1 + 107.204-pH)) + (39.0/(1 + 10pH-7.204)) which incorporates pH (US EPA, 2005: Appendix C)
Guideline Reference: | 1999 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at SJR @ Crows Landing. Samples were collected at SJR @ Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from May 25 2000 to Jun 21 2007.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7931
Pollutant: | Arsenic
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 46 samples exceeded the USEPA Primary MCL and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7931

LOE ID: | 6493
Pollutant: | Arsenic
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 46
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 46 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Arsenic.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Arsenic criteria of 10 ug/L (USEPA Primary MCL).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T The Blue Book
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at SJR @ Crow's Landing. Samples were collected at SJR @ Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jun 7 2001 to Jun 26 2003
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 12168
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin
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 54 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 12168

LOE ID: | 22699
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 19
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 19 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from March to August 2003, representing 19 concentrations.0 of 19 concentrations exceeded the maximum value (0.00093 ug/L).
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | The Board will use the best available technicalinformation to evaluate compliance with the narrativeobjectives. - the Board will consider one tenth of 96 hour LC50 for the most sensitive species tested as theupper limit (daily maximum) for the protection ofaquatic life (CRWQCB, 2006). The one tenth of 96 hour LC50 tested on the most sensitive species in freshwater is 0.00093 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008).
Guideline Reference: | Ecotox database, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (weekly and biweekly) from March to August 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22698
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 20
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 20 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from January to March 2003, representing 20 concentrations.1 of 20 concentrations exceeded the maximum value (0.00093 ug/L).
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | The Board will use the best available technicalinformation to evaluate compliance with the narrativeobjectives. - the Board will consider one tenth of 96 hour LC50 for the most sensitive species tested as theupper limit (daily maximum) for the protection ofaquatic life (CRWQCB, 2006). The one tenth of 96 hour LC50 tested on the most sensitive species in freshwater is 0.00093 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008).
Guideline Reference: | Ecotox database, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected daily during two storms in February and March 2003.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006
LOE ID: | 22708
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 15
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 15 water samples were collected from San Joaquin River between March and August 2004, representing 15 concentrations.0 of 15 concentrations exceeded the maximum value (0.00093 ug/L).
Data Reference: | Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | The Board will use the best available technicalinformation to evaluate compliance with the narrativeobjectives. - the Board will consider one tenth of 96 hour LC50 for the most sensitive species tested as theupper limit (daily maximum) for the protection ofaquatic life (CRWQCB, 2006). The one tenth of 96 hour LC50 tested on the most sensitive species in freshwater is 0.00093 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008).
Guideline Reference: | Ecotox database, http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Crows Landing.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly interval in March, July, and August 2004.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006

DECISION ID | 7932
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 27 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 7932

LOE ID: | 6498
Pollutant: | Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 27
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 27 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 - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
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 the San joaquin River at Crows Landing and at Patterson
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between June 7, 2001 and November 21, 2002
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7933
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 47 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 7933

LOE ID: | 6501
Pollutant: | Copper
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 47
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 47 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Copper.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule 4-day average criteria for dissolved Copper.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at SJR @ Crows Landing. Samples were collected at SJR @ Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from March 1995 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 | 12347
Pollutant: | Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. It was not possible to assess if any of the averaged Nine water samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for Dieldrin of 0.00014 μg/L based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk level for water and fish consumption since the samples had high Reporting Limits, hence this did 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 12347

LOE ID: | 22035
Pollutant: | Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | - Forty-seven water samples were taken from San Joaquin River at Patterson Bridge near Patterson (Merced River to Tuolumne River). - Based on a 30-Day average, there were Nine water samples.- It was not possible to assess if any of the available the Nine water samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for Dieldrin of 0.00014 ug/L based on a human health 10-6 carcinogenic risk level for water and fish consumption since the samples had high Reporting Limits. The data could not be used in the analysis (Listing Policy, Section 6.5.1.1) (SWRCB, 2004).
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | - Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan CVRWQCB. 2007Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000):Criteria based on Human Health Protection (30-day average) with a Dieldrin limit of less than 0.00014 ug/L for water and fish consumption.
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: | Forty-seven water samples were taken from the San Joaquin River near at Patterson bridge (Merced River to Tuolumne River), California.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from San Joaquin River between October 1992 and August 2001. Samples were collected at weekly intervals.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 14034
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eighteen 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. Eighteen of 127 samples exceeded the E. Coli 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 14034

LOE ID: | 23294
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The Westside San Joaquin River Water Quality Coalition collected 1 sample during August 2005. The sample did not exceeded the evaluation objective.
Data Reference: | Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program
| Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
| Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA E. Coli objective of 235/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA 1986).
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at San Joaquin River at WSID Pumps.
Temporal Representation: | Sampling occurred during August 2005.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 23295
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 127
Number of Exceedances: | 18
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 127 samples from July 2002 to June 2006. Eighteen out of the 127 samples exceeded the evaluation objective.
Data Reference: | Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
| Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA E. Coli objective of 235/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA 1986).
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at two locations: San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Sampling occurred from July 2002 to June 2006.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

DECISION ID | 7934
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 47 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 7934

LOE ID: | 6504
Pollutant: | Lead
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 47
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 47 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved lead
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
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 the San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and at Patterson
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between March 28, 1995 and November 21, 2002
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 14031
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the available forty-three (43) samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria for human consumption of water and organisms with a 10-6 risk for carcinogens of 0.019 mg/g and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14031

LOE ID: | 23083
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 43
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | - Fifty-three water samples were collected between June 1994 and August 2001 from the San Joaquin River at Patterson and San Joaquin River below WSID Pump above Tuolumne River near Westley, California. These sites are in the Merced River to Tuolumne River reach of the San Joaquin River. - Samples collected on the same date were averaged resulting in forty-three water samples that were assessed for exceedance. None of the averaged forty-three 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. 2007) Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer. - California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000) based on criteria for human consumption of water and organisms with a 10-6 risk for carcinogens of 0.019 mg/g.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Patterson and San Joaquin River below WSID Pump above Tuolumne River near Westley, California. These sites are in the Merced River to Tuolumne River reach of the San Joaquin River.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly intervals between June 1994 and August 2001.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National field manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chaps. A1-A9, available online at http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 14032
Pollutant: | Malathion
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 39 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the criterion continuous concentration (CCC) and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, 0 of 39 available 1-hour maximum concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration criterion and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14032

LOE ID: | 22714
Pollutant: | Malathion
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 39
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 39 Water samples were collected from San Joaquin River from April to August 2001, representing 39 4-day average concentrations and 39 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 39 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L.0 of 39 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.43 ug/L.
Data Reference: | Surface Water database (SWDB) for Central Valley waterbodies, 2000-2005
| Correspondence between the Department of Pesticide Regulation and Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding water quality data for waterbodies in the Central Valley
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
| Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C
Evaluation Guideline: | US EPA recommended criterion continuous concentration (CCC) 0.1 ug/L (US EPA, 1976). California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criterion is 0.43 ug/L for criterion maximum concentration (CMC) (CDFG, 1998)
Guideline Reference: | Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Malathion to Aquatic Life in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Office of Spill Prevention and Response Administrative Report 98-2
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from San Joaquin River at Laird Park and at Maze Blvd
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at weekly intervals from January 2000 through September 2005.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides

DECISION ID | 7935
Pollutant: | Molybdenum
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 0 of 134 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Using BinomBal listing is recommended if a sample size of 134 has 23 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 7935

LOE ID: | 6509
Pollutant: | Molybdenum
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 134
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 134 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Molybdenum.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CRWQCB, 2006) Molybdenum levels should not to exceed 15 ug/L (Basin Plan Objective)
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at SJR @ Crows Landing. Samples were collected at SJR @ Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Oct 25 1995 to Nov 16 2006
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7936
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 47 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 7936

LOE ID: | 6513
Pollutant: | Nickel
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 47
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 47 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved nickel
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
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 the San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and at Patterson
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between March 28, 1995, and November 21, 2002
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7937
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 124 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Using BinomBal listing is recommended if a sample size of 124 has 11 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 7937

LOE ID: | 6514
Pollutant: | Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 124
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 124 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nitrate-N.
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CRWQCB, 2006)
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | Nitrate-N levels should not to exceed 100 mg/L (USEPA National Ambient Water Quality Objective)
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology. 4304T The Blue Book
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at SJR @ Crows Landing. Samples were collected at SJR @ Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from Jun 29 2000 to Jun 21 2007
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 14027
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eight of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Eight of 511 samples fell below the minimum criterion water quality objective listed in the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14027

LOE ID: | 23293
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One sample was taken from the San Joaquin River in 1993. This one sample fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan the (COLD) Cold Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Patterson Bridge near Patterson, CA.
Temporal Representation: | Sample was collected in May of 1993.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 9, Handbooks for Water-Resources Investigations
LOE ID: | 22762
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 510
Number of Exceedances: | 7
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Five hundred and ten samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between 2001 and 2006. Seven of the Five hundred and ten samples fell below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.
Data Reference: | National Water Quality Assessment database, San Joaquin and Tulare Basins data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan the (COLD) Cold Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between June 2001 and June 2006. Samples were collected at bi-monthly and monthly intervals.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | National Field Manual for the Collection of Water-Quality Data, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Book 9, Handbooks for Water-Resources Investigations

DECISION ID | 7938
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 1 of 45 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 7938

LOE ID: | 6517
Pollutant: | Zinc
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 45
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the 45 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved zinc. The sample that exceeded the calculated CTR CMC for dissolved zinc was collected on 4/26/1995 from the San Joaquin RIver at Crow's Landing contained a dissolved zinc concentration of 150ug/L
Data Reference: | San Joaquin River SWAMP Monitoring Data - Main-Stem San Joaquin River
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved zinc levels should not exceed the calculated CTR 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 the San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and at Patterson
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between March 28, 1995, and November 21, 2002
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 14033
Pollutant: | pH
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seven of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification 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. Seven of 1088 samples exceeded the pH objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 14033

LOE ID: | 23296
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1088
Number of Exceedances: | 7
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 1088 samples from October 1995 to June 2006. Seven out of 1088 samples were outside the acceptable range; four samples were higher than the acceptable range and three samples were lower than the acceptable range.
Data Reference: | Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,raised above 8.5, or changed at any time more than 0.5 units from normal ambient pH.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from two locations: San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and San Joaquin River at Patterson.
Temporal Representation: | Sampling occurred from October 1995 to June 2006.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

DECISION ID | 12233
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: | Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2011
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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. Three of 18 samples exceed the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 μg/L for DDE based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12233

LOE ID: | 21901
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 3
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Ninety water samples were taken from the San Joaquin River between the Merced River and Tuolumne River stretch between June 1994 and August of 2001. - Forty samples were taken from Patterson, Seven samples from below the WSID pump above Tuolumne River near Westley, 23 samples from Crows Landing, and 20 samples from Laird Park. - Based on a 30-day average, the total number of samples were eighteen and three of the eighteen samples exceeded the California Toxic Rule/USEPA (CTR/USEPA) criteria limit of 0.00059 ug/L for DDE (p,p'-DDE; o,p'-DDE) based on a human health carcinogenic risk level of 10-6 for consumption of water and aquatic organisms.- Numerous samples had high reporting limits and the data was not used in the analysis according to the Listing Policy, Section 6.1.5.5.
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) for DDE of 0.00059 ug/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
| Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the San Joaquin River at Patterson bridge near Patterson and below West side pump above Tuolumne River near Westley, San Joaquin River at Crows Landing and San Joaquin River at Laird Park.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from June of 1994 through August of 2001 at weekly intervals.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 15204
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy (Policy). Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. These are temperature data on two life stages for anadromous fish and information on the historical and current state of the fishery. A large number of seven-day averages of maximum (7DADM) daily temperatures exceeded the anadromous fish life stage temperature criteria. Based on readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Nineteen out of 20 yearly maximum 7DADM values calculated from temperature data collected during the adult migration life stage (Julian weeks 36 through 43) from 1996 to 2006 exceeded the narrative temperature objective, and this exceeds the minimum criteria for listing from Table 3.2 of the Policy. 4. Five out of 7 yearly maximum 7DADM values collected during the smoltification life stage (Julian weeks 11 through 24) from 1997 to 2007 exceeded the narrative temperature objective, and this exceeds the minimum criteria for listing from Table 3.2 of the Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 6. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4.5.7 of the Policy.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB-CVR staff concludes that the water body pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 15204

LOE ID: | 26525
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Not Specified
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Fish Migration
Number of Samples: | 7
Number of Exceedances: | 5
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Stream temperatures were measured by CDFG using data loggers (Stowaways, Tidbits and Hobo Temp Pros). Monitoring occurred from 1997 to 2007 depending on the monitoring station, identified by a river mile. The 7DADM was recorded weekly for each river mile. The maximum 7DADM value was calculated for each year. Based on the data provided, 5 out of 7 maximum 7DADM values exceeded the <20oC criteria from 1997 to 2007.
Data Reference: | Cover letter, data and information regarding elevated water temperatures in the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers
| Access and DSS database files of water temperature data, one each for the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | The guideline used was the 2003 US EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards (USEPA, 2003). The document includes recommended temperature criteria for salmon and trout based on different life stages. The recommended temperature for salmon and trout migration is <20oC for a 7DADM. The migration life stage occurs from river mile 86.2 (Dos Rios) to river mile 118 (Hills Ferry). This life stage occurs during Julian weeks 11 through 24, which is approximately March 15th through June 15th.
Guideline Reference: | EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards. EPA 910-B-03-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Office of Water, Seattle, WA.
Spatial Representation: | The smoltification life stage occurs from river mile 86.2 (Dos Rios) to river mile 118 (Hills Ferry). Stream temperatures were monitored at the following stream locations during the smoltification life stage: River Miles 86.2 (Dos Rios), 89 (below Laird Park), 91 (above Laird Park), 93 (above Westport Drain), 102 (Lateral #5 canal), 105 (Crows Landing Bridge), 117 (RV Park), and 118 (Hills Ferry).
Temporal Representation: | The migration life stage occurs from river mile 86.2 (Dos Rios) to river mile 118 (Hills Ferry). Data was collected during this life stage on a continuous basis (hourly intervals) from 1997 through 2007, depending on the station and year monitored. Refer to the California Department of Fish and Game 2007 report (Gordus, 2007) for specific years for each location.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data is supported by a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 31.45 and are acceptable for use in developing the section 303(d) list.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 26526
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Not Specified
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Migration
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | QUALITATIVE (EVALUATED) ASSESSMENT - UNSPECIFIED
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The San Joaquin watershed had a large spring-run of chinook salmon, along with a much smaller fall-run (Hatton and Clark, 1942). By about 1920, chinook salmon populations declined due to changes within the upper San Joaquin watershed. Many changes such as dams, water diversion, mining and harvest have been suggested for their decline. By 1950s salmon became extinct in the mainstem San Joaquin River and populations of less than 500 were a common occurrence in the Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers. However, the gradual decline in salmon populations has been tied to the unsuitable high water temperatures, which increases juveniles susceptibility to disease, predation and accumulation of contaminants (Myrick and Cech 2001). Since 1952 there have been several peak escapement trends, but overall, the trend over time to 2006 has been declining dramatically with the 1952 peak of over 8,000 salmon to 1,000 salmon in 2006. Steelhead, described by Latta (1929, 1949) and other authors write about good numbers and casually being taken by indigeneous peoples. Now the runs are extinct in the mainstem and are listed as a Federally Threatened species.
Data Reference: | Cover letter, data and information regarding elevated water temperatures in the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | In the absence of necessary data to interpret numeric water quality objectives, recent temperature monitoring data shall be compared to the temperature requirements of aquatic life in the water segment. In many cases, fisheries, particularly salmonids, represent the beneficial uses most sensitive to temperature. Information on current and historic conditions and distribution of sensitive beneficial uses (e.g., fishery resources) in the water segment is necessary, as well as recent temperature data reflective of conditions experienced by the most sensitive life stage of the aquatic life species. If temperature data from past (historic) periods corresponding to times when the beneficial use was fully supported are not available, information about presence/absence or abundance of sensitive aquatic life species shall be used to infer past (historic) temperature conditions if loss of habitat, diversions, toxic spills, and other factors are also considered. (SWRCB, 2004)
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Control Policy For Developing California's Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List. Sacramento, CA: State Water Resources Control Board, California Environmental Protection Agency.
Spatial Representation: | San Joaquin River.
Temporal Representation: | Information referenced from year 1920 through 2006.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | San Joaquin Fall-Run Chinook Salmon and Steelhead Rainbow Trout Historical Population Trend Summary. Dean Marston. September 2007.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 26230
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Not Specified
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Fish Migration
Number of Samples: | 20
Number of Exceedances: | 19
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Stream temperatures were measured by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) using data loggers (Stowaways, Tidbits and Hobo Temp Pros). Monitoring occurred from 1996 to 2006 depending on the monitoring station, identified by a river mile. The 7DADM was recorded weekly for each river mile. The maximum 7DADM value was calculated for each year. Based on the data provided, 19 out of 20 maximum 7DADM values exceeded the <20 degrees C criteria from 1996 to 2006.
Data Reference: | Cover letter, data and information regarding elevated water temperatures in the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers
| Access and DSS database files of water temperature data, one each for the San Joaquin, Merced, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne rivers
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Central Valley Region
Evaluation Guideline: | The guideline used was the 2003 US EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards (USEPA, 2003). The document includes recommended temperature criteria for salmon and trout based on different life stages. The recommended temperature for salmon and trout adult migration is <20 degrees C for a 7DADM. The adult migration life stage occurs from river mile 86.2 (Dos Rios) to river mile 118 (Hills Ferry). This life stage occurs during Julian weeks 36 through 43, which is approximately September 1st through October 31st.
Guideline Reference: | EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards. EPA 910-B-03-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Office of Water, Seattle, WA.
Spatial Representation: | The adult migration life stage occurs from river mile 86.2 (Dos Rios) to river mile 118 (Hills Ferry). Stream temperatures were monitored at the following stream locations during the adult migration life stage: River Miles 86.2 (Dos Rios), 89 (below Laird Park), 91 (above Laird Park), 93 (Westport Drain), 117 (RV Park), and 118 (Hills Ferry).
Temporal Representation: | The adult migration life stage occurs during Julian weeks 36 through 43, which is approximately September 1st through October 31st. Data was collected during this life stage on a continuous basis (hourly intervals) from 1996 through 2006, depending on the station and year monitored. Refer to the CDFG 2007 report (Gordus, 2007) for specific years for each location.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data is supported by a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 31.45 and are acceptable for use in developing the section 303(d) list.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 12161
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: | Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2022
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. Seven of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Seven of 19 samples exceed the minimum criterion 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 12161

LOE ID: | 23082
Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Total
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 19
Number of Exceedances: | 7
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | - Fifty-four water samples were taken from the San Joaquin River at Patterson (36 samples) and at the WSID Pump near Westley (7 samples), California between June 1994 and August 2001. - The Fifty-four water samples were averaged on a weekly basis and resulted in forty-nine samples.- Thirty samples had high Reporting Limits hence the data could not be used in the analysis (Listing Policy Section 6.5.1.1) (SWRCB, 2004). - As a result, nineteen samples were assessed for exceedance. Seven of the nineteen samples exceeded the minimum criterion for Alpha-HCH in surface water listed under the National Ambient Water Quality Criteria.
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
| 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 from the San Joaquin River at Patterson and at the WSID Pump near Westley, California.
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between June 1994 and August 2001. Samples were collected at weekly intervals.
Environmental Conditions: |
QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. In accordance with section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy, data from major monitoring programs in California and Published USGS reports are considered of adequate quality.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 6964
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status | Original
Sources: | Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2011
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | N/A
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6964

LOE ID: | 4540
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: | Tissue
Fraction: | Not Recorded
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation: | Unspecified
Temporal Representation: | Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified
QAPP Information: | Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7013
Pollutant: | Group A Pesticides
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status | Original
Sources: | Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2011
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7013

LOE ID: | 4541
Pollutant: | Group A Pesticides
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: | Tissue
Fraction: | Not Recorded
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation: | Unspecified
Temporal Representation: | Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified
QAPP Information: | Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 7014
Pollutant: | Mercury
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status | Original
Sources: | Resource Extraction
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2012
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7014

LOE ID: | 4542
Pollutant: | Mercury
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: | Tissue
Fraction: | Not Recorded
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples: | 0
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation: | Unspecified
Temporal Representation: | Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified
QAPP Information: | Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):