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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name: Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
Water Body ID: CAR5184204020110815230307
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
131790
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
Pollutant: Benthic Community Effects
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: Benthic Community Effects are being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, additional lines of evidence (LOEs) associating the Benthic Community Effects decision with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants other than benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment or habitat assessment LOEs are necessary to place a water body on the 303(d) List for Benthic Community Effects.

Two lines of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. Zero of four benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. These data indicate that the waterbody is likely unimpaired for Benthic Community Effects and therefore no other pollutant LOEs need be associated with this decision at this time.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this waterbody segment 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 four benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. Therefore, this water body is not exceeding the water quality threshold for the protection of the COLD beneficial use. The available information indicates that the waterbody/pollutant combination should not be placed on the 303(d) List of impaired waters at this time.
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:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 131790, Benthic Community Effects
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 95983
 
Pollutant: Benthic Community Effects
LOE Subgroup: Population/Community Degradation
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: The CSCI score for this site was 1.009911. This water body passed several screening criteria and was identified as a reference water body for the purposes of developing the CSCI. Reference sites where human disturbance is absent or minimal are used to set benchmark expectations for healthy streams. A large set of nearly 600 reference sites representing the broad diversity of natural stream types found across California was used to develop the CSCI.
Data Reference: Complete data set for all CSCI reference sites for the entire State.
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The narrative toxicity objective states, "All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life."
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 California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rhen, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use.
Guideline Reference: Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings
 
Spatial Representation: Survey was done at the following site: 518GZCUPX
Temporal Representation: Survey was done 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data collected following SWAMP QA protocols.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 131790, Benthic Community Effects
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 232203
 
Pollutant: Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments
LOE Subgroup: Population/Community Degradation
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed data for 518GZCUPx to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.893497439 to 1.039233933.
Data Reference: California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2020 Integrated Report for Region 5.
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 5 Basin Plan
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: The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use.  
Guideline Reference: Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from station 518GZCUPx.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from 6/30/2014 to 6/7/2016.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data collected following SWAMP QA protocols.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program
 
 
DECISION ID
119576
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
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 119576, Chloride
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 187437
 
Pollutant: Chloride
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Monitoring data for Grizzly Creek (Plumas County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chloride.
Data Reference: Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.
 
SWAMP Data: 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: 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 (518404300)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-18 and 2012-09-18
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: SWAMP QAPrP 2008
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program
 
 
DECISION ID
119577
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
Pollutant: Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
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: 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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 119577, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 192390
 
Pollutant: Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Monitoring data for Grizzly Creek (Plumas County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate + Nitrite as N.
Data Reference: Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 10 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22).
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 (518404300)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-18 and 2012-09-18
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: SWAMP QAPrP 2008
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 119577, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 59565
 
Pollutant: Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective for Nitrate + Nitrite (as N). The Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) MCL objective is 10 mg/L.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Sacramento and San Joaquin River Region (2007): Waters designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) MCL is 10 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 518GZCUPx (Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay).
Temporal Representation: Samples collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
92957
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
Pollutant: Alkalinity as CaCO3
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. Zero of one sample exceed the evaluation guideline.

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 one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
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 92957, Alkalinity as CaCO3
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64290
 
Pollutant: Alkalinity as CaCO3
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Alkalinity as CaCO3.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
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 (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009).
Guideline Reference: National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
92958
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
Pollutant: Nitrite as Nitrite NO2
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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceeds the evaluation guideline.

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 one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 are 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 92958, Nitrite as Nitrite NO2
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 59604
 
Pollutant: Nitrite as Nitrite NO2
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective for Nitrite (as N). The Nitrite (as N) MCL objective is 1 mg/L. The data are reported as non-detects. These non-detects are less than or equal to the water quality standard, the value will be considered as meeting the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Sacramento and San Joaquin River Region (2007): Waters designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The Nitrite (as N) MCL is 1 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 518GZCUPx (Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay).
Temporal Representation: Samples collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
93010
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
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 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 sample exceeds the evaluation guideline.

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 one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 are 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 93010, Nitrogen, Nitrite
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64296
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, Nitrite
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for Nitrite as N.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Primary Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrite (as N) is 1,000 ug/L.
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
Objective/Criterion Reference: Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
94013
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single water sample result does not exceed the calculated criterion continuous concentration for chronic exposure to ammonia in freshwater, protective of the COLD and Fish Spawning beneficial uses, and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. The single water sample result also does not exceed the USEPA Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia, protective of the MUN beneficial use. The single water sample result does not exceed the calculated criterion continuous concentration for chronic exposure to ammonia in freshwater, 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 are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully 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 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 calculated criterion continuous concentration for chronic exposure to ammonia in freshwater, protective of the COLD and Fish Spawning beneficial uses, and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. The single water sample result also does not exceed the USEPA Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia, protective of the MUN beneficial use. The single water sample result does not exceed the calculated criterion continuous concentration for chronic exposure to ammonia in freshwater, 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 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 this water body and 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 94013, Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64291
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Ammonia as N, Total.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for ammonia in freshwater are pH- and temperature-dependent and they are calculated as 30-day rolling average concentrations (criterion continuous concentration, CCC) of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg TAN/L) in freshwater is not to be exceed more than once every three years on average. (USEPA, 2013)
Guideline Reference: Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 94013, Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64295
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Fish Spawning
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 0 of 1 samples exceed the water USEPA Temperature and pH-Dependent values of the CCC (Chronic Criterion) for Fish Early Life Stages Present for ammonia. The data are reported as non-detects. These non-detects are less than or equal to the water quality standard, the value will be considered as meeting the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region (SSJRWQCB 2007): 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.
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: Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia (USEPA 1999): Where salmonids and fish early life stages are present, the 30-day average concentration (criterion continuous concentration or CCC) of total ammonia (as mg N/L) in freshwater are not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average. The CCC values are based on pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages of fish. The CCC formula is found on p.83 and the table of CCC values are found on p.87.
Guideline Reference: 1999 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 518GZCUPx (Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay).
Temporal Representation: Samples collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 94013, Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64292
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Ammonia as N, Total.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: The U.S. EPA 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. (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006).
Guideline Reference: 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
93011
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas 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)(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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of three samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD and SPWN.

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 three samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for COLD and SPWN 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 are 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 93011, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 59450
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Numeric data generated from 1 sample collected had no exceedences.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The dissolved oxygen concentrations shall not be reduced below the following minimum levels at any time: Waters designated COLD 7.0 mg/l
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: The sample was collected from the 518GZCUPx station.
Temporal Representation: One sample was collected in August 2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: SWAMP QAPP
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93011, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64298
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: 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 River 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93011, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64297
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Fish Spawning
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: 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: 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: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
93013
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas 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)(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. Zero of one sample exceeds the evaluation guideline.

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 one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
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 93013, Specific Conductivity
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64293
 
Pollutant: Specific Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for electrical conductivity.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), an upper level (1,600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2,200 uS/cm). The recommended level of 900 uS/cm was used as it is protective of all drinking water 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
Objective/Criterion Reference: Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
93012
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
Pollutant: Sulfates
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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one sample exceeds the evaluation guideline.

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 one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 are 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 93012, Sulfates
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64302
 
Pollutant: Sulfates
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the criterion for Sulfate.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels for sulfate provide a range of values including a recommended level (250 mg/L), an upper level (500 mg/L) and a short-term level (600 mg/L). The recommended level of 250 mg/L was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water 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
Objective/Criterion Reference: Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
93065
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas 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)(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. Zero of one sample exceeds the evaluation guideline.

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 one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
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 93065, Temperature, water
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64303
 
Pollutant: Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Water Temperature.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
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 (1976)
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
93066
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas 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)(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. One of one sample exceeds the evaluation guideline for COLD, MUN and REC.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. One of one sample exceeded the evaluation guideline for COLD, MUN and REC 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
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 93066, pH
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64300
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that the sample result exceeds the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93066, pH
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64301
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that the sample result exceeds the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93066, pH
Region 5     
Grizzly Creek (Plumas County)
 
LOE ID: 64299
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Water Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: SWAMP data indicates that the sample result exceeds the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: Statewide Ref Condition Management Plan 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Grizzly Creek above Grizzly Forebay - 518GZCUPx]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on 8/20/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan