Final California 2010 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 2 - San Francisco Bay Region

Water Body Name:	Permanente Creek
Water Body ID:	CAR2055002119990218132449
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	17635	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Ammonia (Unionized) \| Nitrogen, ammonia (Total 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

Regional Board Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 six samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1of 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.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board 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.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17635, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

28069

Pollutant:

Ammonia (Unionized) | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six water samples were collected by SWAMP Program to assess concentrations of total ammonia and un-ionized ammonia. None of them exceeded the evaluation criteria.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

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.

The San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Board Basin Plan stated that the discharge of wastes shall not cause receiving water to contain concentrations of un-ionized ammonia in excess of 0.025mg/l annual median.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

For Total Ammonia: EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure."

Guideline Reference:

2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations representative of upper reach of the creek PER070 (3 samples) and the lower reach at the bottom of the watershed PER010 (3 samples).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from three seasons, dry, spring and wet season of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The QA was in compliance with SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17803	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Anthracene \| Benzo(a)anthracene \| Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) \| Chrysene (C1-C4) \| DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) \| DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) \| DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) \| Dieldrin \| Endrin \| Fluoranthene \| Fluorene \| Heptachlor epoxide \| Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) \| Naphthalene \| PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) \| PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) \| Phenanthrene \| Pyrene
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

Regional Board Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 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 these pollutants. Zero 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. Zero of one sample exceed the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17803, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

28652

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Concentrations of anthracene, fluorene, napthalene, phenanthrene, benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, chrysene, fluoranthrene, pyrene, PAH (total), PCB (total), dieldrin, DDD/DDE/DDT, endrin, heptachlor epoxide, and HCH, gamma in one sediment sample collected in June 2002 did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) Anthracene - 845 ug/kg; Fluorene - 536 ug/kg; Naphthalene - 561 ug/kg;
Phenanthrene -1170 ug/kg; Benz(a)anthracene - 1050 ug/kg; Benzo(a)pyrene - 1450 ug/kg; Chrysene - 1290 ug/kg; Fluoranthene - 2230 ug/kg; Pyrene - 1520 ug/kg; PAH (total) - 22800 ug/kg; PCB (total) - 676 ug/kg; Chlordane - 17.6 ug/kg; Dieldrin - 61.8 ug/kg; DDD (sum op + pp) - 28 ug/kg; DDE (sum op + pp) - 31.3 ug/kg; DDT (sum op + pp) - 62.9 ug/kg; DDT (total) - 572 ug/kg; Endrin - 207 ug/kg; Heptachlor epoxide - 16 ug/kg; HCH, gamma - 4.99 ug/kg.

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

One sediment sample was collected on Permanente Creek at Charleston Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample collected at a "watershed integrator" site near the mouth of the Permanente Creek in June of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17804	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Arsenic \| Cadmium \| Chromium (total) \| Copper \| Lead \| Mercury \| Nickel \| 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

Regional Board Conclusion:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 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 these pollutants. Zero 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. Zero of one sample exceed the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17804, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

28648

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc in one sediment sample collected in June of 2002 did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) arsenic - 33 mg/kg dw; cadmium - 4.98 mg/kg dw; chromium - 111 mg/kg dw; copper - 149 mg/kg dw; lead - 128 mg/kg dw; mercury - 1.06 mg/kg dw; nickel - 48.6 mg/kg dw; zinc - 459 mg/kg dw.

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

One sediment sample was collected at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Permanente Creek at Charleston Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in June of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17636	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Arsenic \| Chromium (total) \| Copper \| Lead \| Nickel \| Silver \| 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

Regional Board Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 six samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board 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.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17636, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

29026

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Permanente Creek watershed was monitored as part of SWAMP assessment. None of the three samples exceeded the water quality objectives for arsenic, chromium VI, copper, lead, nickel, silver and zinc.
Concentrations of total dissolved chromium were well below the objective for chromium VI.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
Table 3-4 in the Basin Plan (2007) lists freshwater water quality objectives for toxic pollutants: arsenic- 150 ug/L, chromium VI- 11 ug/L, copper - 9.0 ug/L, lead - 2.5 ug/L; nickel - 52 ug/L, silver-3.4 ug/L and zinc - 120 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations on Permanente Creek - PER010 (Charleston Rd) and PER070 (Rancho San Antonio).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during spring, wet, and dry seasons of the 2001-2002 sampling season.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

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	17648	Region 2
Permanente Creek

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	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 six samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board 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.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17648, Cadmium	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

27991

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six water samples were assessed. Concentrations of cadmium did not exceed the water quality objectives.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The objective in the Basin Plan is expressed by formulas where H=ln (hardness) as CaCO3 in mg/l: The four-day average objective for cadmium is e (exp 0.7852H - 3.490). This is 1.1 ug/l at a hardness of 100mg/l as CaCO3. The one hour objective is e (exp 1.128H - 3.828). This is 3.9ug/l at a hardness of 100mg/l as CaCO3.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations representative of upper reach of the creek PER070 (3 samples) and the lower reach at the bottom of the watershed PER010 (3 samples).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected in three seasons, Spring, Wet and Dry of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The QA/QC procedure was in compliance with Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program's (SWAMP) Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17805	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Chlordane
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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 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. One sample exceeds 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 out of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17805, Chlordane	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

28777

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Chlordane exceeded the PEC (sediment quality guidelines) with a sample concentration of 55.1 ug/kg in one sediment sample collected in June 2002.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) Chlordane - 17.6 ug/kg.

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

One sediment sample was collected on Permanente Creek at Charleston Road.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample collected at a "watershed integrator" site near the mouth of the Permanente Creek in June of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17649	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos \| Dacthal \| Diazinon \| Disulfoton \| Endosulfan \| Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) \| Methyl Parathion \| PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) \| Thiobencarb/Bolero
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

Regional Board Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 six samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board 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.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17649, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

29011

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Permanente Creek watershed was monitored as part of SWAMP assessment. None of the six samples exceeded the water quality objectives for Chlorpyrifos, Dacthal, diazinon, disulfoton, endosulfan, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH), methyl parathion, thiobencarb.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
There shall be no chronic toxicity in ambient waters. Chronic toxicity is a detrimental biological effect on growth rate, reproduction, fertilization success, larval development, population abundance, community composition, or any other relevant measure of the health of an organism, population, or community.
Diazinon water quality objective, 0.1 ug/L (acute)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

PCBs - 0.014 ug/L freshwater continuous Concentration; Chlorpyrifos - 0.015 ug/L (chronic); Dacthal (DCPA) - 14300 ug/L (acute); Disulfoton (Disyston) - 0.05 ug/L (acute); Endosulfan - 0.056 ug/L (chronic)/0.22 ug/L (acute); HCH, gamma-(gamma BHC, Lindane) - 0.95 ug/L (acute); methyl parathion - 0.08 ug/L (acute); Thiobencarb - 3.1 ug/L (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations: PER010 (Charleston Rd) and PER070 (Rancho San Antonio) in the Permanente Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected at two locations during wet, spring and dry seasons of the 2001 - 2002 sampling season.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

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	17650	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Copper \| Lead \| Nickel \| Silver \| 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

Regional Board Conclusion:	These pollutants are 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 six samples exceeded the water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board 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.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17650, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

27964

Pollutant:

Copper | Lead | Nickel | Silver | Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Permanente Creek watershed was monitored as part of SWAMP assessment. None of the six samples exceeded the water quality objectives for copper, lead, nickel, silver and zinc.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Table 3-4 in the Basin Plan (2007) lists freshwater water quality objectives for toxic pollutants: copper - 9.0 ug/L, lead - 2.5 ug/L; nickel - 52 ug/L, silver - 3.4 ug/L and zinc - 120 ug/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations representative of upper reach of the creek PER070 (3 samples) and the lower reach at the bottom of the watershed PER010 (3 samples).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from three different seasons: wet, dry, and spring of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The Quality Control is is conducted in accordance with SWAMP's Quality Management Plan of 2002.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17806	Region 2
Permanente Creek

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 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. One out of one sample exceeded 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 out of one sample exceeded the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of five samples is needed for application of table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17806, Escherichia coli (E. coli)	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

29020

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were collected as part of SWAMP sampling in the summer of 2002 at 7-day intervals and the geometric mean of the samples calculated over a five week interval. Samples were collected at one location, PER080, every 7 days for a total of 30 days. The geometric mean was 145 MPN/100 mL, which exceeds the 126 MPN/100ml criteria.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Uses of water for recreational activities involving body contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming, wading, water-skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, whitewater activities, fishing, and uses of natural hot springs.

Water contact implies a risk of waterborne disease transmission and involves human health; accordingly, criteria required to protect this use are more stringent than those for more casual water-oriented recreation.
U.S. EPA water quality criteria for water contact recreation based on the frequency of use a particular area receives - 1986: the E. coli criterion is not to exceed 126 organisms/100 mL. The value is expressed as a 7-day geometric mean based on five or more samples per 30day period; designated beach (max) 235 MPN/100 mL.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at PER080 (Lower Meadow/West Branch).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from 7/22/2002 through 8/19/2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

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	17640	Region 2
Permanente Creek

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of five samples exceeded the water quality objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of five samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because there is insufficient number of exceedances to determine that the standards are not met.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17640, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

29268

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water quality assessment was conducted at the Permanente Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2002. Continuous field monitoring at 15 minute increments of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at between one or two sites. Continuous monitoring sondes were deployed 5 times at 1-2 monitoring locations during wet, spring and two dry seasons. The 7 day average for dissolved oxygen ranged from 0.81 to 10.71 mg/L. The concentration dropped below the 7.0 mg/L threshold three of the 5 deployments during the 2002 sampling season.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The numeric water quality objective for dissolved oxygen is 7.0 mg/L minimum for waters designated as cold water habitat. The median dissolved oxygen concentration for any three consecutive months shall not be less than 80 percent of the dissolved oxygen content at saturation.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Spatial Representation:

Dissolved oxygen was measured at between one and two sites located on the mainstream of Permanente Creek that are representative of the entire creek length.

Temporal Representation:

In 2002 the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of dissolved oxygen at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1 to 2 weeks during winter (1 site), spring (1 site), and two summer dry seasons (1, 2 sites).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

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	16095	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Sediment Toxicity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess toxicity in Permanente Creek. One water sample exhibits limited toxicity. Based on the readily available data for this water body, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available 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 concerning current conditions and supporting the listing decision satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Water toxicity was observed in one sample tested and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because there is insufficient number of exceedances to confirm toxicity and to determine that the standards are not met.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 16095, Sediment Toxicity	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

8574

Pollutant:

Sediment Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data used to evaluate sediment toxicity comprise one sediment sample collected by the SWAMP in 2002. The sample displayed statistically significant toxicity during the 10-day Hyalella azteca test and exhibited diminished growth at 72.1% of control.
In addition, many organic contaminants were found in the sediment above Threshold Effect Concentrations (TEC). Chlordane was particularly elevated above the Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) of 17.6 ug/kg.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment toxicity was evaluated according to the SWAMP methodology. Sample toxicity was determined by comparing mean organism response in samples and in negative controls. Statistical evaluation (alpha = 0.05) and a default threshold of 80% of the control value were used to establish whether the sediment exhibited significant toxicity adversely impacting aquatic organisms

Guideline Reference:

Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, vol. 16, No. 6, pp 13221329

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at one sampling location at the lower part of Permanente Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sample was collected during the dry summer season of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

The lower reach data are representative of the predominantly urbanized area with a highly modified channel draining into South San Francisco Bay.

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

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	17646	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of five samples exceeded the water quality objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of five samples is needed for application of table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because there is insufficient information to determine that the standards are not met.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17646, Temperature, water	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

29033

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water quality assessment was conducted at the Permanente Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2001-2003. Continuous field monitoring at 15 minute increments of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at one location. Continuous monitoring sondes were deployed 4 times at 1 monitoring location during wet, spring and two dry seasons. The measured temperatures ranged from 10.59oC to 28.06oC and varied with season and location. The 7-day mean temperature threshold for steelhead was exceeded in 2 of the five deployments during the monitoring season. Both exceedances occurred in summer months.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Temperature objectives for enclosed bays and estuaries are specified in the "Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays of California" including any revisions to the plan. In addition, the following temperature objectives apply to surface waters: The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such an alteration does not adversely affect beneficial uses. The temperature of any cold or warm freshwater habitat shall not be increased by more than 5°F (2.8°C) above natural receiving water temperature.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sullivan et al. (2000) reviewed a wide range of studies incorporating information from laboratory-based research, field observations, and risk assessment approaches and developed criteria for assessing temperature risk to aquatic life. The 7-day mean temperature (maximum value of a 7-day moving average of the daily mean temperature) of 14.8°C was established as the upper threshold criterion for coho salmon and 17.0°C for steelhead trout. The risk assessment approach used by Sullivan et al. (2000)suggest that temperatures exceeding the above thresholds will cause a 10% reduction in average growth compared to optimal conditions.

Guideline Reference:

An Analysis of the Effects of Temperature on Salmonids of the Pacific Northwest with Implications for Selecting Temperature Criteria

Spatial Representation:

Temperature was measured at two sites PER010 and PER050 located on the mainstream of Permanente Creek.

Temporal Representation:

In 2002-2003 the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of temperature at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1-2 weeks at two locations. PER010 was monitored during four different seasons: winter, spring, and two summer dry seasons. PER050 was monitored in spring runoff season of 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB, 2002).

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	17647	Region 2
Permanente Creek

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	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 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of five samples exceeded the water quality objectives and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of five samples is needed for application of table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board 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.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17647, pH	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

29038

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water quality assessment was conducted at the Permanente Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2001-2003. Continuous field monitoring of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at one or two locations on Permanente Creek. Continuous monitoring sondes were deployed 5 times at 1 or 2 monitoring locations during wet, spring and two dry seasons. The pH ranged from 6.95 to 8.70 and varied with season. The pH exceeded the maximum allowable threshold once during spring monitoring in PER010, and did not drop below the minimum for any deployment.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5. This encompasses the pH range usually found in waters within the basin. Controllable water quality factors shall not cause changes greater than 0.5 units in normal ambient pH levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

pH was measured at 1 or 2 sites located on the mainstream of Permanente Creek.

Temporal Representation:

In 2002-2003 the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of temperature at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1 to 2 weeks at one or two locations in four different seasons: winter, spring, and two summer dry seasons.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

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	7651	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Selenium, Total
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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceed the NTR total selenium criterion for continuous concentration (chronic). Based on the readily available data for this water body, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available in favor of adding this water segment-pollutant combination to the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data concerning current conditions and supporting the listing decision were collected as part of the SWAMP and satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Six of 12 samples exceeded the NTR criterion for total selenium 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.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be added to the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7651, Selenium, Total	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

5765

Pollutant:

Selenium, Total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SCVURPPP (2007) monitoring program of Santa Clara Basin creeks collected water quality data at two monitoring locations corresponding to the SWAMP sampling points. Three out of six samples collected in 2005, 2006 and 2007 exceeded the NTR continuous total selenium concentration criterion.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Assessment Summary Report: Santa Clara Basin Creeks (2002-2007). Watershed Monitoring and Assessment Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

NTR total selenium criterion for continuous concentration (chronic objective) in water for the protection of aquatic life is 5.0µg/L (Basin Plan 2007, Table 3-4). The criterion is linked and applicable in streams with waters that support cold water ecosystems, including preservation or enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation, fish, or wildlife, including invertebrates.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations representative of upper reach of the creek (2 samples) and the lower reach at the bottom of the watershed (4 samples).

Temporal Representation:

SCVURPPP samples were collected during dry and wet seasons from 2005 through 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

The lower reach data are representative of the predominantly urbanized area with a highly modified channel draining into South San Francisco Bay.

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7651, Selenium, Total	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

4790

Pollutant:

Selenium, Total

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water quality assessment was conducted in the Permanente Creek watershed as part of SWAMP assessment. The aim of the monitoring was to determine patterns of water quality, protection of beneficial uses and potential impacts of land use and water management. Sampled parameters included physical and biological indicators, conventional water quality, water metals and toxicity as well as sediment metals and toxicity.
Three out of six samples collected at two monitoring locations during 2002 exceeded the NTR continuous total selenium concentration criterion.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations representative of upper reach of the creek (3 samples) and the lower reach at the bottom of the watershed (3 samples).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during spring, dry and wet season of 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

The lower reach data are representative of the predominantly urbanized area with a highly modified channel draining into South San Francisco Bay.

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

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	9171	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Toxicity
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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 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. This water body experiences toxicity. Based on the readily available data for this water body, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available in favor of adding this water segment-pollutant combination to the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data concerning current conditions and supporting the listing decision satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Six out of 6 water samples exhibited significant chronic toxicity to Selenastrum and the benthic community was considered to be degraded. The number of samples with detected significant water toxicity exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be added to the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 9171, Toxicity	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

8571

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six samples were collected in 2002-2003 to evaluate water toxicity at two monitoring locations at the most downstream and upstream reaches of the creek. The toxicity tests included survival and reproduction of Ceriodaphnia, survival and growth of fathead minnow, and growth of Selenastrum.
In all six samples at both locations, during all 3 seasons Selenastrum growth was significantly reduced. Selenastrum growth on average did not exceed 60.9% of the control with one sample from the downstream location exhibiting only 44.6% growth compared to control. At one station during winter Ceriodaphnia had significant mortality.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

There shall be no chronic toxicity in ambient waters. Chronic toxicity is a detrimental biological effect on growth rate, reproduction, fertilization success, larval development, population abundance, community composition, or any other relevant measure of the health of an organism, population, or community.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Water toxicity was evaluated according to the SWAMP methodology. The U.S.EPA whole effluent toxicity protocol (U.S.EPA 1994) was used to test the effect of water samples on three freshwater test organisms. Statistical evaluation (alpha = 0.05) and a default threshold of 80% of the control value were used to establish whether water exhibited significant toxicity adversely impacting aquatic organisms.

Guideline Reference:

Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, vol. 16, No. 6, pp 13221329

Short-Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms. EPA/600/4-91/002. Third Edition. July 1994

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at two sampling locations representative of upper reach of the creek (3 samples) and the lower reach at the bottom of the watershed (3 samples).

Temporal Representation:

SWAMP samples were collected during spring, dry and wet season of 2002-2003.

Environmental Conditions:

The lower reach data are representative of the predominantly urbanized area with a highly modified channel draining into South San Francisco Bay.

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

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	7646	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Trash
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Illegal dumping \| Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.11, listing may be proposed based on the situation-specific weight of evidence. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The line of evidence consists of data from field visits/trash surveys conducted according to the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) methodology. Based on the readily available trash assessment data for this waterbody, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination to the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. Data have been evaluated that supports this decision. 2. The Rapid Trash Assessment methodology results showed that this waterbody had threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at the only location surveyed in this waterbody on four different dates. 3. This waterbody is considered impaired by trash because there were exceedances of the evaluation guideline (poor condition category for the trash assessment metric) in more than one location or on more than one date. 4. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 5. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1 of the Policy.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not met and trash contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7646, Trash	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

5368

Pollutant:

Trash

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Nuisance

Matrix:

Not Specified

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data results were obtained through application the RTA methodology, developed by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The RTA documents the total number and characteristics of pieces of trash per one hundred feet of stream or shoreline. The trash assessment protocol involves picking up and tallying all of the trash items found within the defined boundaries of a site. The tally results for level of trash (relating to REC2) and threat to aquatic life (relating to WILD) assessment parameters were considered for the listing determination. These results are available for field visits/trash surveys conducted in March, July, and October 2003, and March 2004 according to the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology. There were exceedances of the evaluation guideline (poor condition category for the trash assessment metric) in more than one location or on more than one date.

Data Reference:

A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams

Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) data collected by the SF Bay Region Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program from 2002-2005 and method description

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.

The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing.

If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal.

Guideline Reference:

A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams

Spatial Representation:

RTA data were collected for this waterbody at one location in 2003 and 2004. This location scored in the poor condition category for the threat to aquatic life parameter.

Temporal Representation:

RTA data were collected for this waterbody in March, July, and October in 2003 and March 2004. Data from all four months scored in the poor condition category for the threat to aquatic life parameter.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

For RTA trash assessment data to be considered, the data must have been collected by field operators that have received a 2-hour training in the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	6257	Region 2
Permanente Creek

Pollutant:	Diazinon
Final Listing Decision:	List on 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	Original
Sources:	Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
TMDL Name:	San Francisco Bay Urban Creeks Diazinon
TMDL Project Code:	9
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA:	05/16/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	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. 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 Francisco Bay Urban Creeks Diazinon TMDL was approved by USEPA on 5/16/07 (USEPA, 2007).

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. The water body should remain in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because the TMDL approved by USEPA and the implementation plan are in place.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6257, Diazinon	Region 2
Permanente Creek

LOE ID:

1808

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

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)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

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):