| Water Body Name: | Chicken Ranch Slough |
| Water Body ID: | CAR5192100019980817094238 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
6789 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| 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 | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| TMDL Name: | Sacramento Area Urban Creeks TMDLs |
| TMDL Project Code: | 194 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 11/30/2004 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 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.
One 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 6.1 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1 of the Policy. 3. One of 5 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average maximum concentration criterion and these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy, due to sample size. 4. The Sacramento County Urban Creeks TMDL has been approved by the Central Valley Regional Board in 2004 and approved by USEPA on 11/30/2004. 5. 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, 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. |
| 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): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 21744 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial 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: | Five water samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough between January 2005 and February 2007, representing five calculated 4-day average concentrations and five 1-hour average concentrations. One of the five calculated 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day average criterion of 0.10 ug/L. One of five 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average criterion of 0.16 ug/L. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Sacramento River Watershed Program Annual Reports for 1999-2000, 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003, and 2003-2004; and BDAT data 1998-2003 | ||||
| Evaluation of Additional Pesticide Monitoring Data - 2007 Update | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-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. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | California Fish and Game Hazard Assessment diazinon criteria for freshwater aquatic life protection: 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. | ||||
| 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 | ||||
| Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Water samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Hurley Way. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected at variable intervals (e.g. monthly) from January 2005 to February 2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2002-0206) requirements. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2653 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| 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 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): | |||||
DECISION ID |
12945 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Pyrethroids |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | 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 sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 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 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. Two of 4 sediment samples collected from Chicken Ranch Slough exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella azteca (an amphipod invertebrate species) survival compared to control, and this exceeds the narrative toxicity objective and the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Sediment-bound pyrethroid pesticide concentrations were used to calculate toxic units (TUs) of multiple pyrethroid pesticides observed in sediments. Pyrethroid TU analyses correlated with the distribution and magnitude of the observed toxicity. 5. 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, 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. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 30936 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pyrethroids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of four sediment samples exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella aztec (an amphipod invertebrate) survival compared to control, and this violates the narrative toxicity objective. Toxicity observations were associated with pyrethroid pesticides. LC50s for sediment-bound pyrethroids were used as toxicity threshold benchmarks in a Toxic Unit (TU) analysis normalized to organic carbon content. The TU analysis of Chicken Ranch Slough sediment samples demonstrated that the two toxic samples had pyrethroid pesticide concentrations that would be expected to be acutely toxic. Sediment samples collected from Chicken Ranch Slough had an average of 1.36 to 4.19 TUs of pyrethroid pesticides. Bifenthrin appears to play a dominant role in the toxicity observations, but was not the only pyrethroid found in the two toxic sediment samples. Other pyrethroids observed in the two toxic sediment samples from Chicken Ranch Slough included cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, and permethrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. 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 Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference of sediment 10-day toxicity compared to control, using Dunnett's test with Hyalella azteca (an invertebrate amphipod species) as the test species. Arcsin squareroot transformation was used when necessary to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Steel's test was used for comparison to control if these assumptions were not met after transformation.
LC50 values, based on 10-day exposure to Hyallela azteca of pyrethroids in sediment samples, were used to determine Toxic Unit (TUs) for pyrethroids in sediments. Urban creek sediment sample pyrethroid concentrations were compared the TUs to determine exceedances. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | |||||
| Distribution and Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides in Agriculture-Dominated Water Bodies of Californias Central Valley | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sacramento River Watershed Program from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way. Chicken Ranch Slough sampling locations reflect mixed commercial and residential land uses. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sediment samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 31 August 2004, 24 October 2004, 10 March 2005, and 12 August 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2001b, 2002b, 2003b, 2006). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 21767 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of four sediment samples exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella aztec (an amphipod invertebrate) survival compared to control, and this violates the narrative toxicity objective. The two toxic sediment samples (and their mean mortality + standard deviation) were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 24 October 2004 (39+23.6) and on 10 March 2005 (33+19.1). The cause of the toxicity has been determined to be pyrethroids. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-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. (CVRWQCB, 2007). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference of sediment 10-day toxicity compared to control, using Dunnett's test with Hyalella azteca (an invertebrate amphipod species) as the test species. Arcsin squareroot transformation was used when necessary to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Steel's test was used for comparison to control if these assumptions were not met after transformation. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | |||||
| Distribution and Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides in Agriculture-Dominated Water Bodies of Californias Central Valley | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sacramento River Watershed Program from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way. Chicken Ranch Slough sampling locations reflect mixed commercial and residential land uses. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Sediment samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 31 August 2004, 24 October 2004, 10 March 2005, and 12 August 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2001b, 2002b, 2003b, 2006). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
17932 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Sediment 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: | State Board Conclusion:
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 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 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. Two of 4 sediment samples collected from Chicken Ranch Slough exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella azteca (an amphipod invertebrate species) survival compared to control, and this exceeds the narrative toxicity objective and the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Sediment-bound pyrethroid pesticide concentrations were used to calculate toxic units (TUs) of multiple pyrethroid pesticides observed in sediments. Pyrethroid TU analyses correlated with the distribution and magnitude of the observed toxicity. 5. 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: | N/A |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | This listing recommendation was developed by State Board staff. It was not part of the Regional Board record. After review of the available data and information, SWRCB 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. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 21767 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of four sediment samples exhibited a statistically significant difference in Hyalella aztec (an amphipod invertebrate) survival compared to control, and this violates the narrative toxicity objective. The two toxic sediment samples (and their mean mortality + standard deviation) were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 24 October 2004 (39+23.6) and on 10 March 2005 (33+19.1). The cause of the toxicity has been determined to be pyrethroids. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-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. (CVRWQCB, 2007). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Statistically significant difference of sediment 10-day toxicity compared to control, using Dunnett's test with Hyalella azteca (an invertebrate amphipod species) as the test species. Arcsin squareroot transformation was used when necessary to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance. Steel's test was used for comparison to control if these assumptions were not met after transformation. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | |||||
| Distribution and Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides in Agriculture-Dominated Water Bodies of Californias Central Valley | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sediment samples were collected under the Sacramento River Watershed Program from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way. Chicken Ranch Slough sampling locations reflect mixed commercial and residential land uses. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Sediment samples were collected from Chicken Ranch Slough at Cottage Way on 31 August 2004, 24 October 2004, 10 March 2005, and 12 August 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for Monitoring prepared for the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP 1999a, 1999b, 2000b, 2001b, 2002b, 2003b, 2006). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
6788 |
Region 5 |
Chicken Ranch Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
| 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: | Sacramento Area Urban Creeks TMDLs |
| TMDL Project Code: | 194 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 11/30/2004 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
The Sacramento Urban Creeks TMDLs have been approved by the RWQCB on 2004 and subsequently approved by USEPA in 2004. 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 in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the section 303(d) list. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision made by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the USEPA in 2006 . No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| 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): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2652 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| 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 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): | |||||