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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 2 - San Francisco Bay Region

Water Body Name:	Codornices Creek
Water Body ID:	CAR2033001120080624162950
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	17199	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	Anthracene \| Benzo(a)anthracene \| Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) \| Chrysene (C1-C4) \| 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:	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. The single sample did not 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. The single sample did not exceeded the water quality guidelines 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17199, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28635

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm 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, DDE/DDT, endrin, heptachlor epoxide, and HCH, gamma in one sediment sample collected in spring 2005 did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines.

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.

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 at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	17200	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	Arsenic \| Cadmium \| Copper \| Lead \| 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:	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 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The one sample does not 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. The single sample did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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 17200, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28634

Pollutant:

Arsenic | Cadmium | Copper | Lead | Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm 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, copper, lead and zinc in one sediment sample collected in April 2005 did not exceed the sediment quality guidelines.

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.

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; copper - 149 mg/kg dw; lead - 128 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 Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	17201	Region 2
Codornices 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:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of three samples exceeded the water quality guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17201, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28843

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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

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.
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 one sampling location (COD020) on Cordornices Creek at 2nd Street.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during wet (January), spring (April), and dry (June) seasons of the 2005.

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	17263	Region 2
Codornices 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 section 3.1 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. The one sample exceeds the water quality guidelines 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17263, Chlordane	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28775

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The concentration of chlordane of 24.5 ug/kg in one sediment sample collected in spring 2005 exceeded the PEC (sediment quality guidelines).

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.

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 at a "watershed integrator" site located close to the mouth of Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	17202	Region 2
Codornices 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:	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 three samples exceeded the water quality guidelines 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, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

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 17202, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28962

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Codornices Creek watershed was monitored as part of SWAMP assessment. None of the three samples exceeded the water quality objectives for PCBs, 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 one sampling location (COD020) in the Cordornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during wet (January), spring (April), and dry( June) seasons of 2005.

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	17268	Region 2
Codornices Creek

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

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 one 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 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 of one sample exceeded the water quality guidelines 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17268, Chromium (total)	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28759

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Concentrations of chromium in one sediment sample collected in April 2005 was 123 mg/kg dw and exceeded the PEC guideline.

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.

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) chromium - 111 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 Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	17276	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
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 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 of one sample exceeded the water quality guidelines 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17276, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28776

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample exceeded the PEC (sediment quality guidelines) for DDD at 40.9 ug/kg in one sediment sample collected in spring 2005.

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.

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) 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.

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 Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	9437	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	Low Dissolved Oxygen
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:	One line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this water body. Based on the readily available data for this water body, 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 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. Dissolved oxygen measurements at 11 continuous deployments exceeded the applicable water quality objectives on three occasions for waters designated as warm water habitat and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that there is insufficient information to demonstrate that this water body is not meeting applicable water quality standards for dissolved oxygen to support the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. Therefore, the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list.

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 9437, Low Dissolved Oxygen	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

8687

Pollutant:

Low Dissolved Oxygen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm 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:

Data used to evaluate dissolved oxygen was collected by SWAMP in 2004. In 3 out of 11 seasonal deployments, minimum dissolved oxygen levels fell below the objective of 5 mg/L. The three deployments where this occurred were dry season deployments in the lower and mid-watershed.

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:

The numeric water quality objective for dissolved oxygen is 5.0 mg/L minimum for waters designated as warm freshwater 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:

Spatial Representation:

Dissolved oxygen was measured at three sites spanning lower to upper watershed locations on this creek.

Temporal Representation:

The SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of dissolved oxygen at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1-2 weeks in two dry seasons and one wet season in 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

The Codornices Creek watershed is highly urbanized, and large portions of the original waterways have been altered or placed in culverts. The creek flows from headwaters in the western slopes of the East Bay ridge, through East Bay cities, into the eastern side of the SF Bay. Sites monitored represent mostly urban land use. The creek is spring fed to a limited extent. However, the adjacent cities often contribute dry weather flows, rendering the creek wet year round.

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	17270	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	Mercury
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 one 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 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 of one sample exceeded the water quality guideline 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17270, Mercury	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28761

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Concentrations of mercury in one sediment sample collected in April 2005 exceeded the PEC guideline at a sample concentration of 1.171 mg/kg dw.

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.

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) mercury - 1.06 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 Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	17271	Region 2
Codornices Creek

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

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 one 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 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 of one sample exceeded the water quality guideline 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17271, Nickel	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28760

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Concentrations of nickel in one sediment sample collected in April 2005 exceeded the PEC guideline at a sample concentration of 74.7 mg/kg dw.

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.

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) nickel - 48.6 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 Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Sediment sample was collected in April of 2005.

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	17284	Region 2
Codornices 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 placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 of one sample 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17284, Sediment Toxicity	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28867

Pollutant:

Sediment Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm 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 spring 2005. This sample displayed statistically significant toxicity during the Hyalella azteca test. Hyalella azteca growth was only 63% of the control.

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.

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 Codornices Creek.

Temporal Representation:

A sample was collected in spring season (April 2005).

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	17203	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	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 placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of three 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, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

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 17203, Toxicity	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28995

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected in 2005 to evaluate water toxicity at one monitoring location near the mouth of Baxter Creek. The toxicity tests included survival and reproduction of Ceriodaphnia, survival and growth of fathead minnow, and growth of Selenastrum. Selenastrum growth was significantly lower than the control in one of three samples (spring sample). Growth was 44.3 percent of the control for this sample.

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:

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 one sampling location, COD020, (Codornices at 2nd Street) on three (3) occasions, representative of the lower reach of the creek.

Temporal Representation:

SWAMP samples were collected during winter wet season (January), spring season (April), and dry season (June) of 2005.

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	17285	Region 2
Codornices 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 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 eleven samples exceeded the water quality objectives and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

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 17285, pH	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

28966

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Comprehensive water quality assessment was conducted at Codornices Creek watershed as part of SWAMP assessment in 2004 and 2005. Continuous field monitoring of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at one or two locations. The pH ranged from 7.0 to 8.5 and varied with season. The pH did not exceed the maximum or go below the minimum during any sampling event.

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:

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 two or three sites located on the mainstem of Codornices Creek that are representative of the entire creek length.

Temporal Representation:

At all locations the SWAMP performed continuous monitoring of pH at 15 minute intervals lasting 7-16 days during spring (March 2004), summer dry seasons (July and September 2004), and winter wet season (January 2005).

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	9163	Region 2
Codornices Creek

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Channelization \| Habitat Modification \| Removal of Riparian Vegetation
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing 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. A sufficient number of samples exceed the water quality objective. 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. Temperature measurements at 6 out of 11 continuous deployments exceeded the 17 °C evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective for waters designated as cold water habitat and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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 9163, Temperature, water	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

8555

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 Codornices Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2004-2005. 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 three locations.

Continuous monitoring sondes were deployed 11 times at 3 monitoring locations during wet, spring and two dry seasons. The measured temperatures ranged from 8.9°C to 21.5 °C and varied with season and location. During both dry season deployments at all 3 monitoring locations the 7-day mean temperature threshold for steelhead was exceeded. In total, the 17 °C criterion was exceeded in 6 out of 11 deployments. The durations of the temperature exceedances ranged from 19 to over 125 hours.

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:

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 Water Board that such alteration in temperature 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 the 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) suggests that temperatures exceeding the above thresholds will cause 10% reduction in average fish 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 three sites located on the mainstem of Codornices Creek that are representative of the entire creek length. The highest temperatures were recorded at the most downstream monitoring station in September 2004.

Temporal Representation:

In 2004 and 2005 the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of temperature at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1-2 weeks in each of three different seasons: winter (3 sites), spring (2 sites), and two summer dry seasons (3 sites each 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	7637	Region 2
Codornices 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) on three 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 7637, Trash	Region 2
Codornices Creek

LOE ID:

5366

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 November 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 in one location in 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 November in 2004. Data from all three 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):