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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)
Water Body ID:	CAR5440000020200212047028
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	125196	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

Pollutant:	Alkalinity as CaCO3
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

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 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125196, Alkalinity as CaCO3	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

199470

Pollutant:

Alkalinity as CaCO3

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 STORET data for Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Alkalinity as CaCO3.

Data Reference:

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

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; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Alkalinity as CaCO3 levels were assessed for the protection of freshwater aquatic life by comparison to the Evaluation Guideline value of 20,000 ug/L (4 day average)(National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-29 and 2015-04-29

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.


DECISION ID	125190	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

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 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125190, Boron	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

200155

Pollutant:

Boron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Water Quality for Agriculture, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1985, contains criteria protective of various agricultural uses of water, including irrigation of various types of crops and stock watering. At or below the limits presented in the Water Quality Goals tables, agricultural uses of water should not be limited. These criteria were used to translate narrative water quality objectives for chemical constituents that prohibit chemicals in concentrations that would impair agricultural uses of water. The criteria for boron is 700 ug/L (0.7 mg/L).

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985)

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-29 and 2015-04-29

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.


DECISION ID	125191	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

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 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125191, Chloride	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

200888

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for chloride incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 250 mg/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-29 and 2015-04-29

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.


DECISION ID	125193	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

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 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125193, Sulfates	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

205001

Pollutant:

Sulfates

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for sulfate incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 250 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-29 and 2015-04-29

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.


DECISION ID	125194	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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. Pursuant to section 6.1.5.9 of the Listing Policy, this assessment utilized the upper limit of the optimal temperature range for rainbow trout for growth and completion of most life stages to interpret the narrative water quality objective for temperature. 10 of 24 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. However, the available data are insufficient to satisfy the Listing Policy requirements for spatial and temporal representation (sections 6.1.5.2 and 6.1.5.3). The surface water grab samples collected did not provide sufficient temporal and spatial representation to determine if temperature conditions experienced by aquatic life were within the optimal temperature range throughout the entire water column or the length of time temperature conditions may have exceeded the optimal temperature range. Available information for this waterbody-pollutant combination is insufficient to determine whether the aquatic beneficial use is supported. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available for this Integrated Report cycle indicating that standards are not met. However, the exceedances of the evaluation guideline indicate that beneficial uses may be threatened. This decision will be reevaluated in the next Integrated Report cycle as more data and information become available. Additional data and information may include information demonstrating that sample location(s) are representative of conditions throughout the waterbody, data from additional sampling locations, continuous monitoring data collected in the waterbody, waterbody-specific information on sensitive resident species, their life stage time frames, and the appropriate temperature thresholds necessary to support each life stage.

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 125194, Temperature, water	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

206182

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:

Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 10 of 24 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature.

Data Reference:

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

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 (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans.

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 (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125194, Temperature, water	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

206178

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:

WQX 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 (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125194, Temperature, water	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

206155

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:

WQX 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 (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.


DECISION ID	125192	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. A total of three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use, zero of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for the non-contact recreation beneficial use and zero of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for the water contact recreation beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. 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. A total of zero of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use, zero of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for the non-contact recreation beneficial use and zero of 24 samples exceed the water quality objective for the water contact recreation beneficial use. 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:

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125192, pH	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

204637

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:

Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 24 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH.

Data Reference:

WQX 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 (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125192, pH	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

204620

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:

Data Reference:

WQX 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 (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125192, pH	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

204191

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:

WQX 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 (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.


DECISION ID	125195	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

Pollutant:	Total Dissolved Solids
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2035
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. 1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 6 of the 10 samples exceed the criteria/objective for the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use. 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 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. 6 of the 10 samples exceed the criteria/objective for the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	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 be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 125195, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 5
Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion)

LOE ID:

206750

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

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 STORET data for Sugar Cut (in Delta Waterways, southern portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 10 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total Dissolved Solids.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for total dissolved solids incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 500 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CALWR_WQX-B9D74761253)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-05-20 and 2016-03-01

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

STORET

QAPP Information Reference(s):

This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.