Draft California 2020 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Diggins Creek (Nevada County)
Water Body ID:	CAR5173203020110315132233
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	123444	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Oxygen, Dissolved
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of the 69 samples exceed the objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat. 1 of the 68 samples exceed the objective for Fish Spawning. 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. 1 of the 69 samples exceed the objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat. 1 of the 68 samples exceed the objective for Fish Spawning. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123444, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

59344

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The single daily averaged sample did not exceed the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in this water body.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants at Placer County Utilities, 2005-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Basin Plan, the minimum level for dissolved oxygen is 7 mg/L for waters designated as COLD.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Sample collected at site 51 -Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

Sample collected on 4/20/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123444, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

208139

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Diggins Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 68 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-06 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123444, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

208265

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as SPWN is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-06 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	126484	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Specific 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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 72 samples, reported as a total concentration or with the fraction not reported, exceeded the OBJECTIVE for MUN. 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 72 samples, reported as a total concentration or with the fraction not reported, exceeded the OBJECTIVE for MUN, 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 decision was made by SWRCB staff.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126484, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

59343

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

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 the 2 daily averaged samples exceeded the water quality objective for electrical conductivity in this water body.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants at Placer County Utilities, 2005-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The secondary MCLs for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), upper level (1600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2200 uS/cm). The 'recommended' level of 900 uS/cm was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449.

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected at site 51-Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

Samples collected on 4/20/2001 and 11/13/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126484, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230024

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

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:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Diggins Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 70 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for SpecificConductivity.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin for specific conductance is 900 uS/cm.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	123446	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 71 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. Zero of the 70 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for Fish Spawning and Fish Migration. 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 71 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. Zero of the 70 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for Fish Spawning and Fish Migration, 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 decision was made by SWRCB staff.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123446, Temperature, water	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

62617

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The single sample did not exceed the evaluation guideline for temperature in this water body (SYRCL, 2010).

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. In determining compliance with the water quality objectives for temperature, appropriate averaging periods may be applied provided that beneficial uses will be fully protected (Central Valley Regional Board Basin Plan, Pg. III-8.00, Water Quality Objectives).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

The lethal temperature threshold for Steelhead adult migration and holding and juvenile growth and rearing is 24 degrees Celsius. (Carter, 2008).

Guideline Reference:

Effects of Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen/Total Dissolved Gas, Ammonia, and pH on Salmonids. Implications for California's North Coast TMDLs. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region

Spatial Representation:

Sample was collected at the following location: SYRCL monitoring station 51, Hiller Tunnel

Temporal Representation:

Sample was collected 4/20/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123446, Temperature, water	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230275

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Fish Spawning

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123446, Temperature, water	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230210

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Fish Migration

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123446, Temperature, water	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

230307

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).

Guideline Reference:

Inland Fishes of California

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-11 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	123445	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	pH
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 68 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. Two of the 66 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for REC-1, REC-2, and SHELL. 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. Two of the 68 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for COLD. Two of the 66 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE for REC-1, REC-2, and SHELL, 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 decision was made by SWRCB staff.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123445, pH	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

62616

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 2 daily averaged samples exceeded the water quality objective for pH in this water body.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants at Placer County Utilities, 2005-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Basin Plan, pH levels should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected at site 51 -Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

Daily samples collected between February, 2009 and August, 2010.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

CITIZEN WATER MONITORING QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN FOR THE YUBA WATERSHED MONITORING COMMITTEE (June 30, 2008)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123445, pH	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228510

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SYRCL River Monitoring Program data for Diggins Creek (Nevada County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 66 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH.

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-06 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123445, pH	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228441

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-06 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123445, pH	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228726

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Shellfish Harvesting

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-06 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 123445, pH	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

228699

Pollutant:

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:

Data Reference:

Field data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (SYRCL 12)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-11-06 and 2018-11-09

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Ronning, K. 2019. Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Citizen Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Yuba/Bear Monitoring Committee


DECISION ID	92762	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Chromium
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 one samples exceed the CTR criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater for WARM. 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 one samples exceed the CTR criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater for WARM and 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 fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. 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 92762, Chromium	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

62613

Pollutant:

Chromium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample did not exceeded the CTR value of 180 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) for chromium to protect aquatic life in freshwater. Assuming a hardness of 100 mg/L the value is 180 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from station 51 - Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected on 11/13/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	92763	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Copper
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. One of one samples exceed the CTR criterion continuous concentrations for WARM. 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. One of one samples exceed the CTR criterion continuous concentrations for WARM and 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 fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. 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 92763, Copper	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

62614

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample exceeded the CTR value of 9 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) for copper to protect aquatic life in freshwater. Assuming a hardness of 100 mg/L the value is 9 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from station 51 - Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected on 04/20/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	95068	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

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 CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single water sample result does not exceed the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentration (0.77 ug/L) intended to protect freshwater aquatic organisms from chronic exposure, expressed as a 4-day average concentrations. 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. The single water sample result does not exceed the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentration (0.77 ug/L) intended to protect freshwater aquatic organisms from chronic exposure, expressed as a 4-day average concentrations. 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 are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.1 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 95068, Mercury	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

62615

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample did not exceed the criteria of 0.77 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations are intended protect freshwater aquatic organisms from chronic exposures and are expressed as 4-day average concentrations. The value for mercury in freshwater is 0.77 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected from station 51 - Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected on 04/20/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	92764	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

Pollutant:	Zinc
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. One of one samples exceed the CTR criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater for WARM. 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. One of one samples exceed the CTR criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater for WARM and 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 fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. 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 92764, Zinc	Region 5
Diggins Creek (Nevada County)

LOE ID:

62618

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample exceeded the CTR value of 120 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data in Yuba: metal, 2000-2007 and conventional, 2000-2010.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) for zinc to protect aquatic life in freshwater. Assuming a hardness of 100 mg/L the value is 120 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected from station 51 - Hiller Tunnel.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected on 04/20/2001.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with Water Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan prepared for the Yuba Watershed Monitoring Committee (Revision 1.3) dated June 30, 2008.

QAPP Information Reference(s):