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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)
Water Body ID:	CAR5518000020090112105219
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	15765	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of 28 samples fell below the minimum criterion water quality objective listed in the Tulare Lake Basin Plan and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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 15765, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26364

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 1 DO measurements at Fresno Weir in 2004, 2 of 21 DO measurements at Manning Avenue (one each in September and December 2005), and 0 of 6 DO measurements at Reed Avenue in 2005 were below the Water Quality Objective of 7 mg/L. Two of the 28 DO measurements were below the Water Quality Objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Tulare Lake Basin Plan the (COLD) Cold Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Dissolved oxygen levels were measured in the Kings River at Fresno Weir, Manning Avenue, Reed Avenue, and Lemoore Weir.

Temporal Representation:

Dissolved oxygen was measured once in July 2004 at Fresno Weir, once in August 2004 and typically monthly between January 2005 and October 2006 at Manning Avenue, and typically daily between January 27 and February 4 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

Main Fork Kings River extends downstream from Pine Flat Dam to Island Weir.

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	15768	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

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 3.1 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 9 samples exceeded the narrative toxicity 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 15768, Sediment Toxicity	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26369

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 9 samples tested with Hyalella azteca were toxic.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

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. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 10-day Hyalella azteca sediment toxicity tests.

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from five locations: Kings River at James Bypass, Kings River at James Bypass/Weir, Kings River at Lemoore Weir, Kings River at Manning Avenue, and near Kings River at Reed Avenue.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from October 2004 to October 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	15769	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four 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. Four of 85 samples exceeded the pH objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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 15769, pH	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26370

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 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program collected 22 samples from December 2002 to June 2004. None of the 22 samples had a pH value outside the acceptable pH range.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Data from the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP), San Joaquin River Basin - 2007 Data Review

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,raised above 8.5, or changed at any time more than 0.5 units from normal ambient pH. Measurement of pH within the range of 6.5 and 8.5. A high pH value is greater than 8.5

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:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from six locations: Kings River at Fresno Weir, Kings River at Peoples Weir, Kings River at Island Weir, Kings River at South Fork, Kings River at South Fork 2, and North Fork Kings River at Exvelsior Avenue.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred from December 2002 to June 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 15769, pH	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26371

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 Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition collected 63 samples from July 2004 to October 2006. Four out of 63 samples were outside the acceptable range; two samples were higher than the acceptable range and two samples were lower than the acceptable range.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,raised above 8.3, or changed at any time more than 0.3 units from normal ambient pH.

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:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from seven locations: Kings River at Fresno Wier, Kings River at Jackson Avenue bridge, Kings River at Jackson Avenue, Kings River at James Bypass/Wier, Kings River at Lemoore Wier, Kings River at Manning Avenue, and Kings River at Reed Avenue.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred from July 2004 to October 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	15766	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Agriculture
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	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. Three lines of evidence, consisting of one or two samples each, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. There are no applicable saltwater aquatic life standards or criteria for magnesium in inland saline waters. 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 satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The sediment data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. There are no applicable water quality standards or criteria and the data cannot be assessed using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. State Board Review and Conclusion: The Regional Board conclusion language for this pollutant and selected listing decision were inconsistent with the data contained in the LOE. State Board staff have corrected the decision language to correspond with the LOE, and the decision has been changed to List, as the data support recommending this water body to be listed for chlorpyrifos. The new decision language is as follows: 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. Three samples exceed the narrative toxicity water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of 12 calculated 4-day average chlorpyrifos concentrations exceeded the 4-day average chlorpyrifos criterion, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Four of 15 available 1-hour average chlorpyrifos concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average chlorpyrifos criterion, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 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 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 following changes to the decision: 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. The fact sheet for this decision contained errors and did not reflect the data that was contained for chlorpyrifos in the line of evidence. The State Water Board staff recommend to List chloropyrifos based on the data in the line of evidence.

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 15766, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26365

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

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:

15 water samples were collected from Kings River from July 2004 to October 2006, representing 12 4-day average concentrations and 15 1-hour average concentrations.3 samples exceeded the 4-day average concentration guideline of 0.015 μg/L. 4 samples exceeded the 1-hour concentration guideline of 0.025 μg/L.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

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 (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

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 Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.015 ug/L 4-day average and 0.025 ug/L 1-hour average (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Kings river at Reed Avenue, Lemoor Weir, and Manning.

Temporal Representation:

Monthly samples were collected between July and October 2006; Four daily samples were collected between 27 to 30 January 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

Main Fork Kings River extends downstream from Pine Flat Dam to Island Weir.

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	15767	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

Pollutant:	Unknown Toxicity
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for 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. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Forty-four of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Forty-one of 50 samples tested with selenastrum exceed the narrative toxicity objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 15767, Unknown Toxicity	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26366

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Forty-one of 50 samples tested with Selenastrum capricornutum were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. One sample collected at Fresno Weir exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:06 July 2004 (66)Three samples collected at Kings River at Jackson Avenue Bridge exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:20 July 2004 (58)02 August 2004 (57)16 August 2004 (75)Two samples collected at Kings River at James Bypass exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:17 May 2006 (68)21 June 2006 (78)Two samples collected at Kings River at James Bypass/Weir exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:07 June 2005 (67)25 April 2006 (73)Nineteen samples collected at Kings River at Lemoore Weir exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:06 July 2004 (70)08 August 2004 (64)16 March 2005 (89)12 April 2005 (88)10 May 2005 (86)07 June 2005 (69)19 July 2005 (73)23 August 2005 (77)27 September 2005 (89)23 February 2006 (60)01 March 2006 (82)25 April 2006 (90)17 May 2006 (76)21 June 2006 (80)19 July 2006 (73)14 August 2006 (69)05 September 2006 (75)03 October 2006 (84)Fourteen samples collected at Kings River at Manning Avenue exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:08 August 2004 (69)12 April 2005 (84)07 June 2005 (65)19 July 2005 (77)23 August 2005 (77)27 September 2005 (88)21 December 2005 (80)23 February 2006 (58)01 March 2006 (87)15 March 2006 (90)18 May 2006 (81)19 July 2006 (78)14 August 2006 (84)05 September 2006 (73)

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day chronic-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-013

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from six locations: Kings River at Fresno Wier, Kings River at Jackson Avenue Bridge, Kings River at James Bypass, Kings River at James Bypass/Wier, Kings River at Lemoore Wier, and Kings River at Manning Avenue.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from June 2004 to October 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 15767, Unknown Toxicity	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26368

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two of the 50 samples tested with Pimephales promelas were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. One sample collected at Kings River at Lemoore Weir exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:23 February 2006 (88)One sample collected at Kings River at Manning Avenue exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:23 February 2006 (55)

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from six locations: Kings River at Fresno Weir, Kings River at Jackson Avenue Bridge, Kings River at James Bypass, Kings River at James Bypass/Weir, Kings River at Lemoore Weir, and Kings River at Manning Avenue.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from June 2004 to October 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 15767, Unknown Toxicity	Region 5
Kings River, Lower (Pine Flat Reservoir to Island Weir)

LOE ID:

26367

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 50 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia was toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. One sample collected at Kings River at Manning Avenue exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:05 September 2006 (75)

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from June 2004 to October 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Excellent. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):