Final California 2018 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Pinto Lake was collected at 9 monitoring sites [ 305PNTO3s - Pinto Lake - South near docks - surface, 305PNTO1m - Pinto Lake - West Arm - mid water column depth, 305PNTO1b - Pinto Lake - West Arm - bottom depth, 305PNTO1s - Pinto Lake - West Arm - surface depth, 305PNTO2b - Pinto Lake - Center - bottom depth, 305PNTO2s - Pinto Lake - Center - surface depth, 305PNTO2m - Pinto Lake - Center - mid water column depth, 305PNTO3m - Pinto Lake - South near docks - middle of water column, 305PNTO3b - Pinto Lake - South near docks - bottom]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory


DECISION ID	84107	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Aldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84107, Aldrin	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77338

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Region)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Aldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Pinto Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Pinto Lake - 305PPL088]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008).

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84109	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Chlordane
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. One out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. One out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. These do 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84109, Chlordane	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77333

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp (composites averaged) and 1 from largemouth bass. The sample for common carp exceeded the guideline. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in fish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84109, Chlordane	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77332

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Chlordane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	74304	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Chloride
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
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 133 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the 133 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74304, Chloride	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

15331

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when chloride exceeds 106 mg/L in irrigation supply water.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory


DECISION ID	84110	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84110, Chlorpyrifos	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56798

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 1 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for chlorpyrifos in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84111	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Diazinon
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84111, Diazinon	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56799

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 1 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for diazinon in fish tissue is 1,500 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84150	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. One out of one fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. One composite for largemouth bass was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. One out of one fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. These do 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84150, Dieldrin	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77335

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The sample for common carp exceeded the guideline. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. One composite for largemouth bass was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in fish tissue is 0.32 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84150, Dieldrin	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77334

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged by species. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Dieldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	83166	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Electrical Conductivity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	No new data are assessed. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 132 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the 132 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83166, Electrical Conductivity	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

15332

Pollutant:

Electrical Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

132

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed City of Watsonville Monitoring at Pinto Lake (PintoLake) data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 132 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us).

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory


DECISION ID	84151	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Endrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84151, Endrin	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77336

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged by species. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84151, Endrin	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77337

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	85457	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Escherichia coli (E. coli)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 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. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986) set to protect for Water Contact Recreation (i.e. swimming, wading etc.). This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the evaluation guideline 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85457, Escherichia coli (E. coli)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56800

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 15 samples exceeded the E. coli Objective of 235 MPN/100mL.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli is 235/100 MPN. USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Pinto Lake Dock. CAL3051003020020124122807

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from May 2009 to July 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

NO QAPP provided. Data quality ok. City of Watsonville.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84152	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Ethion
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84152, Ethion	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56802

Pollutant:

Ethion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Ethion. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 1 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for ethion in fish tissue is 1,100 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	67558	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Heptachlor
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 67558, Heptachlor	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77341

Pollutant:

Heptachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84112	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Heptachlor epoxide
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. Zero out of zero fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. Three composites were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. Zero out of zero fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. These do 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84112, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77342

Pollutant:

Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor Epoxide concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84112, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77343

Pollutant:

Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Three composites were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in fish tissue is 0.93 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1999)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84113	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84113, Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77344

Pollutant:

Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Hexachlorobenzene. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in fish tissue is 2.8 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84114	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guidelines. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guidelines. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84114, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77346

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for lindane in fish tissue is 4.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84114, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77345

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Lindane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	75666	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Mercury
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of fourteen fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of fourteen fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75666, Mercury	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

31014

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Fish were collected for tissue analysis at one location from Pinto Lake. A total of 13 sample composites were generated from two species: Largemouth Bass (11) and Common Carp (2). Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). A total of 0 out of 13 samples exceeded the OHHEA fish tissue screening value for human health.

Data Reference:

Data associated with report entitled: Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 0.3 mg/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).

Guideline Reference:

Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from one location in Pinto Lake. As discussed in the Lakes and Reservoirs Report (SWAMP, 2009), individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody with an approximate one-mile diameter, from which multiple fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on July 25, 2007

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in "Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75666, Mercury	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77347

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. Composites were generated from largemouth bass (11 composites - 1 fish per composite) and common carp (2 composites - 5 fish per composite). Composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged by species. Two common carp composites could not be used in the assessment due to total fish lengths that did not fall within lengths noted in the guideline. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA 304(a) recommended water quality criterion for concentrations of methylmercury in fish tissue of trophic level 4 fish (150 - 500 mm; fillet wet weight) is 0.20 mg/kg. This is assuming a 32 g/day consumption rate (USEPA, 2001).

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury. Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Office of Water. EPA-823-R-01-001. January 2001

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84239	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Mirex
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of zero fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. Three composites were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of zero fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84239, Mirex	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77348

Pollutant:

Mirex

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Three composites were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in fish tissue is 0.28 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1992)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	77156	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Nitrate
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
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. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 148 nitrate samples exceed the water quality objectives for Municipal & Domestic Supply or for Agricultural Supply. Zero of the 15 Nitrate/Nitrite samples exceed the water quality objectives for Municipal & Domestic Supply or for Agricultural Supply. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the samples exceed the water quality objectives for Municipal & Domestic Supply or for Agricultural Supply 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77156, Nitrate	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56806

Pollutant:

Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of 15 samples collected at the sample site exceeded the criteria for nitrate plus nitrite.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for nitrate plus nitrite is 10 mg as N/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Pinto Lake Dock.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from May 2009 to July 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77156, Nitrate	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56805

Pollutant:

Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of 15 samples collected at the sample site exceeded the criteria for nitrate + nitrite as N.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3.4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 lists the maximum concentration for nitrate + nitrite as N for livestock watering as 100 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Pinto Lake Dock.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from May 2009 to July 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77156, Nitrate	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

15042

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77156, Nitrate	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56808

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of 15 samples collected at the sample site exceeded the criteria for nitrite as nitrogen.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Pinto Lake Dock.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from May 2009 to July 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77156, Nitrate	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56804

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of 15 samples collected at the sample site exceeded the criteria for nitrate as N.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of advers effect shall be as derived from Table 3-3 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-3 shows that concentrations of nitrate as N greater than 30 mg/L will cause sever problems for sensitive crops.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Pinto Lake Dock.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from May 2009 to July 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77156, Nitrate	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

15041

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory


DECISION ID	83169	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Nitrogen, Nitrite
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83169, Nitrogen, Nitrite	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56807

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrite

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of 15 samples collected at the sample site exceeded the criteria for nitrite.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3.4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for nitrite for livestock watering is 10 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at station Pinto Lake Dock.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly from May 2009 to July 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84277	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84277, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56810

Pollutant:

PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for PAH, Total. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated from 2 species: 1 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). PAH, Total is calculated as a potency weighted concentration with respect to benzo(a)pyrene and was calculated based on the following analytes: Dibenz(a,h)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benz(a)anthracene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene, Anthracene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Chrysene, Acenaphthene, Acenaphthylene, Fluoranthene, Fluorene, Phenanthrene, and Pyrene.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in fish tissue is 0.7 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84278	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. One out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. One out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. These do 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84278, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77349

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total PCB was assessed for as follows: PCB aroclors and congeners were summed separately and the sum that yielded the highest value was used for the assessment.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total PCB concentration of 500 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84278, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77350

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The sample for common carp exceeded the guideline. The common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged by species. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total PCB was assessed for as follows: PCB aroclors and congeners were summed separately and the sum that yielded the highest value was used for the assessment.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in fish tissue is 2.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	84279	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Selenium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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 fish tissue sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. 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 fish tissue sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84279, Selenium	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56812

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: common carp. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for selenium in fish tissue is 7.4 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A background dietary consumption rate of 0.114 mg/day is applied for this micronutrient. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	74345	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Turbidity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.1 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.2 the site exceeded numeric objectives for conventional pollutants. According to the binomial distribution, waters shall be placed on the section 303(d) list if the number of measured exceedances supports rejection of the null hypothesis as presented in Table 3.2. However, Pinto Lake is not steelhead habitat and therefore this Evaluation Guideline is not applicable. 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. Pinto Lake is not steelhead habitat and therefore this Evaluation Guideline is not applicable. 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74345, Turbidity	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

14952

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

131

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed City of Watsonville Monitoring at Pinto Lake (PintoLake) data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 27 of 131 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.

Guideline Reference:

Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory


DECISION ID	84108	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84108, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77331

Pollutant:

alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in fish tissue is 13,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Guideline Reference:

Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84108, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77339

Pollutant:

alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endosulfan, Total concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	83168	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Ammonia
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2018
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	The pollutant name was changed to ¿Ammonia¿ in the 2014 assessment cycle. This decision replaces the previously approved decision for total ammonia and combines that decision with the data for unionized ammonia. This decision contains all of the LOEs from those decisions in addition to new LOEs. 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. Two lines of evidence (LOEs) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 14 samples exceed the water quality objective for unionized ammonia set to protect aquatic life and this use is not supported. Zero of the 133 samples exceed the EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia in drinking water and this use is fully supported. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of the 14 samples exceed the water quality objective for unionized ammonia set to protect aquatic life 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83168, Ammonia	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

56797

Pollutant:

Ammonia (Unionized)

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:

2 of 14 samples exceed the water quality objective for Un-ionized Ammonia (as N). Un-ionized ammonia (as N) was calculated from Total Ammonia (as N) from monthly samples reported in the data. The Un-ionized ammonia (as N) values were then established and compared to the Un-ionized Ammonia (as N) at 0.025 mg/L in the RB3 Basin Plan.

Data Reference:

City of Watsonville Long Term Management Strategy Data, May 2009-Jul. 2010

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Region (CCRWQCB 2011): All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters for toxicity.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Pinto Lake Dock.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly from May 2009 to June 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83168, Ammonia	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

15024

Pollutant:

Ammonia as Nitrogen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed City of Watsonville Monitoring at Pinto Lake (PintoLake) data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 133 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total.

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

USEPA Health Advisory 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

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

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory


DECISION ID	80885	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Chlorophyll-a
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2018
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	No new data are assessed. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.1 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.2 the site exceeded numeric objectives for conventional pollutants. According to the binomial distribution, waters shall be placed on the section 303(d) list if the number of measured exceedances supports rejection of the null hypothesis as presented in Table 3.2. Twenty-seven of 61 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) and 22 of the 61 samples also exceed the World Health Organization Guideline for moderate probability of adverse health effects (e.g. skin irritations and gastrointestinal illness). Each of these support rejection of the null hypothesis. In addition, photos show the extent of the bio-stimulation issues at pinto lake, where the water color is green throughout the summer and fall and the water is thick with algae. 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. Twenty-seven of 61 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) and 22 of the 61 samples also exceed the World Health Organization Guideline for moderate probability of adverse health effects (e.g. skin irritations and gastrointestinal illness). Each of these exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Photos document algal blooms in Pinto Lake and this violates the General Water Quality Objective set to protect aquatic life beneficial uses. 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 80885, Chlorophyll-a	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

15330

Pollutant:

Chlorophyll-a

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed City of Watsonville Monitoring at Pinto Lake (PintoLake) data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 27 of 61 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. In addition, three photos are available in the administrative record and show algal blooms in Pinto Lake.

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Aerial photo showing algal bloom in Pinto lake

Presentation slides showing Microcystin data from Pinto Lake and other California waters.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water quality standards table

Evaluation Guideline:

North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards

Guideline Reference:

North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Pinto Lake was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 305PNTO3s - Pinto Lake - South near docks, 305PNTO1s - Pinto Lake - West Arm, 305PNTO2s - Pinto Lake - Center]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 80885, Chlorophyll-a	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

27027

Pollutant:

Chlorophyll-a

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Waterboard Staff assessed chlorophyll a data collected from a three monitoring sites in Pinto Lake (305PINTO1, 305PINTO2 and 305PINTO1) to determine beneficial use support. These three sites are spatially independent and are located more than 200m apart. In addition to chlorophyll a analysis City of Watsonville staff also identified algal species present and made note of the relative density of these algae in each sample. The WHO guideline for chlorophyll a levels at which there is a moderate probability of adverse health effects (e.g. skin irritations and gastrointestinal illness) is 50 ug/L and having a dominance of cyanobacteria. The WHO guidelines also state the following genera are among ¿the most common toxic cyanobacteria in freshwater¿: Microcystis, Anabaena and Aphanizomenon. Chlorophyll a samples were collected monthly from each of the three sites in the lake between June 2005 and May 2006. Of these, 22 of 61 chlorophyll a samples results exceeded 50 ug/L. In all but two samples exceeding the guideline value, one or more of the above listed cyanobacteria genera were dominate in the sample.

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective for all inland surface waters states that waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

The WHO guideline for chlorophyll a levels at which there is a moderate probability of adverse health effects (e.g. skin irritations and gastrointestinal illness) is 50 ug/L and having a dominance of cyanobacteria.

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for sage recreational water environments. Chapter 8: Algae and cyanobacteria in freshwater.

Guideline Reference:

Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A Guide to their Public Health Consequences, Monitoring and Management. World Health Organization. Edited by I. Chorus and J. Bartram. Long, England. 400 pp

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected from three monitoring sites in Pinto Lake (305PINTO1, 305PINTO2 and 305PINTO1).

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected monthly by City of Watsonville Staff between June 2005 and May 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	76205	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2018
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	No new data are assessed. But, the data were assessed using newer evaluation guidelines. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Thirteen of the 14 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the Drinking Water beneficial use (USEPA, 2015). Seven of the 14 samples exceed the Water Contact Recreation(i.e. swimming) beneficial use (OEHHA, 2012). Ten of 14 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline (World Health Organization Guidelines) applied here to interpret toxic levels for wildlife. In addition to exceedances of this guideline value, Microcystis cells were identified in all 14 samples analyzed by the Watsonville City Laboratory. 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. Thirteen of the 14 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the Drinking Water beneficial use and seven of the 14 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the Water Contact Recreation (i.e. swimming) beneficial use and these 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 76205, Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

27034

Pollutant:

Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins

LOE Subgroup:

Adverse Biological Responses

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed microcystin toxin data collected from a single monitoring site in Pinto Lake, 305PINTO3s, to determine beneficial use support. Data was collected weekly between 9/28/2006 and 1/10/2007 by City of Watsonville Staff and analyzed at the City¿s lab. All fourteen samples contained Microcystis cells. Ten of fourteen samples exceed the criterion for Municipal and Domestic Supply objective as defined by the WHO guidelines (a tolerable daily intake (TDI) guideline value of 1.0 ug/L or ppb). Additional information on the data used for this assessment is below in "Environmental Conditions".

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

City of Watsonville - Pinto Lake data submittal and correspondence

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

Evaluation Guideline:

World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines for drinking-water quality establishes a tolerable daily intake (TDI) guideline value of 1.0 ug/L for microcystin-LR toxin in drinking water. WHO states this value should be applied to total cell-bound and extracellular microcystins.

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for sage recreational water environments. Chapter 8: Algae and cyanobacteria in freshwater.

Guideline Reference:

Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A Guide to their Public Health Consequences, Monitoring and Management. World Health Organization. Edited by I. Chorus and J. Bartram. Long, England. 400 pp

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected from a single sample location (305PINTO3s- Pinto Lake at the boat ramp - sub surface sample).

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected weekly by City of Watsonville Staff between 9/28/2006 and 1/10/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Two different analytical test kits were used by City of Watsonville Staff to analyze Microcystin concentration in samples from Pinto Lake. Both Test kits use an Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) to determine microcystin toxin concentration. Samples collected prior to November 8, 2006 were analyzed using Qualitube ET-022, a semi-quantitative method that provides results in three categories (3.0ppb

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 76205, Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

79532

Pollutant:

Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins

LOE Subgroup:

Adverse Biological Responses

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed City of Watsonville data and thirteen of the 14 samples exceed the evaluation guideline.

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

SWAMP Data:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

USEPA Ten-day health advisory for bottle-fed infants and young children of pre-school age is 0.3 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Drinking Water Health Advisory for the Cyanobacterial Microcystin Toxins

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected from a single sample location (305PINTO3s- Pinto Lake at the boat ramp - sub surface sample).

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected weekly by City of Watsonville Staff between 9/28/2006 and 1/10/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 76205, Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

79534

Pollutant:

Cyanobacteria hepatotoxic microcystins

LOE Subgroup:

Adverse Biological Responses

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed City of Watsonville data and seven of the 14 samples exceed the evaluation guideline.

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

SWAMP Data:

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) established 0.8 ug/L as the water concentration that would theoretically expose the child swimmer to the dose identified as the maximum dose to which a person may be exposed with little to no risk of harm.

Guideline Reference:

Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected from a single sample location (305PINTO3s- Pinto Lake at the boat ramp - sub surface sample).

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected weekly by City of Watsonville Staff between 9/28/2006 and 1/10/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	84312	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5, 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. Two out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect the commercial beneficial use. Zero out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. For the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use, this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for 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 out of two fish tissue samples exceeded the evaluation guideline applied to protect for the commercial beneficial use. 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84312, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77351

Pollutant:

Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total DDT concentration of 1000 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84312, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

77340

Pollutant:

Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Tissue

Matrix:

Tissue

Fraction:

Fish fillet

Beneficial Use:

Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fish tissue analysis

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. Three composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: 2 from common carp (composites averaged) and 1 from largemouth bass. The 2 common carp composites were not spatially independent (as defined in the Listing Policy) and so were averaged. The samples for common carp and largemouth bass exceeded the guideline. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD.

Data Reference:

Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008

Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008

Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (2011): There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in fish tissue is 15 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008)

Guideline Reference:

Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 7/25/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments


DECISION ID	75645	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	Scum/Foam-unnatural
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2018
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	No new data are assessed. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.7.1 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Under Section 3.7.1 waters may be placed on the Section 303(d) list when a significant nuisance condition exists as compared to reference conditions. A single line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Multiple photographs show the presence of algal scum on the surface of Pinto Lake. In addition, one photo shows staff wadding into the lake and algae sticking to the chest waders. The photo evidence clearly shows that algal blooms are a nuisance. In addition, Pinto lake is impaired for low dissolved oxygen, pH, elevated levels of suspended chlorophyll a and the presence of the Microcystin toxin. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for 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. Photo documentation clearly shows a nuisance condition resulting from the algal bloom in Pinto Lake. 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 75645, Scum/Foam-unnatural	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

27033

Pollutant:

Scum/Foam-unnatural

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Central Coast Waterboard Staff assessed photo documentation of algal blooms in Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support. The WHO guidelines state that there is a high probability of adverse health effects from ¿cyanobacterial scum formation in areas where whole body contact and or risk of ingestion/aspiration occur.¿ Three photos in the administrative record demonstrate the severity of the algal scum in Pinto Lake in September 2005 and in October 2006. Data provided by the City of Watsonville also show elevated levels of blue green algae (or cyanobacteria) including Microcystis sp and its toxin Microcystin (see LOE #27034).

Data Reference:

Aerial photo showing algal bloom in Pinto lake

Presentation slides showing Pinto Lake data

Pinto Lake Algae Scum layer photo

Pinto Lake Algae Scum photo 002

Photo showing staff retrieving a dead bird (American Coot) from Pinto Lake near the launch ramp.

Pinto Lake water sample September 2007

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective for all inland surface waters states that waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams and scum in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The WHO guidelines state that there is a high probability of adverse health effects from ¿cyanobacterial scum formation in areas where whole body contact and or risk of ingestion/aspiration occur.¿

Guideline Reference:

Guidelines for sage recreational water environments. Chapter 8: Algae and cyanobacteria in freshwater.

Guideline Reference:

Toxic Cyanobacteria in Water: A Guide to their Public Health Consequences, Monitoring and Management. World Health Organization. Edited by I. Chorus and J. Bartram. Long, England. 400 pp

Guideline Reference:

Cyanobacteria in California Recreational Water Bodies. Providing Voluntary Guidance about Harmful Algal Blooms, Their Monitoring, and Public Notification. Draft. September 2008. Blue Green Algae Work Group of the State Water Resources Control Board, Department of Public Health, and Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment

Spatial Representation:

Information and photo documentation for this line of evidence was collected Pinto Lake at various locations and from various vantage points.

Temporal Representation:

Information was collected from January 2005 through December 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Central Coast Waterboard Staff assessed photo documentation of algal blooms in Pinto Lake to determine beneficial use support. The WHO guidelines state that there is a high probability of adverse health effects from ¿cyanobacterial scum formation in areas where whole body contact and or risk of ingestion/aspiration occur.¿ The WHO guidelines also state the presence of algal and cyanobacteria scum¿s (or detection of 100,000 cells/mL) are examples of ¿conditions that may result in a severe health outcome and thus merit a public health advisory.¿ Three photos in the administrative record demonstrate the severity of the algal scum in Pinto Lake in September 2005 and in October 2006. LOE # 27034 documents the presence of Microcystin toxin at concentrations above the Tolerable Daily Intake levels identified by the World Health Organization.

QAPP Information:

Photo Documentation is not typically covered under QAPPs

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	74511	Region 3
Pinto Lake

Pollutant:	pH
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	No new data are assessed. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.1 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.2 the site exceeded numeric objectives for conventional pollutants. According to the binomial distribution, waters shall be placed on the section 303(d) list if the number of measured exceedances supports rejection of the null hypothesis as presented in Table 3.2. 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. Twenty-six of 133 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality objective, 27 of the 133 samples exceed the Warm Freshwater Habitat water quality objective and 42 of 133 samples exceed the numeric objective for Municipal & Domestic Supply, Non-Contact Recreation and Water Contact Recreation. Each of these 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74511, pH	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

14814

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74511, pH	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

14830

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74511, pH	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

14829

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74511, pH	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

14812

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/10/2005-5/22/2006. City of Watsonville monitoring at Pinto Lake was conducted monthly.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Grab samples are analyzed at a ELAP certified laboratory and follows the laboratory QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

e-mail stating no QAPP but all analysis is conducted at ELAP certified laboratory

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74511, pH	Region 3
Pinto Lake

LOE ID:

14813

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

133

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Final Data File used for assessment: Multiple data sets, City of Santa Maria, Watsonville and Santa Barbara Channel Keeper Data