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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name: Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
Water Body ID: CAR5613002120101024223514
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
129228
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Aldicarb
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy.

Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy).

LOE 66583 has been replaced by LOE 221496 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy.

Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 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.
 
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 129228, Aldicarb
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221496
 
Pollutant: Aldicarb
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aldicarb.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Aldicarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.46 ug/L for a fish (chronic).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129206
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Atrazine
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.

LOE 66587 has been replaced by LOE 221419 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129206, Atrazine
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221419
 
Pollutant: Atrazine
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Atrazine.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Atrazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of <1 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129216
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Bromacil
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD. LOE 66591 has been replaced by LOE 221466 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of the sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 129216, Bromacil
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221466
 
Pollutant: Bromacil
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Bromacil.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Bromacil is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 6.8 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129207
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Dacthal
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:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 129207, Dacthal
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221649
 
Pollutant: Dacthal
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dacthal.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Dacthal is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of >1100 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute) and vascular plant (acute). The benchmark was derived from a \greater-than\" value (for example, > 265,000) and may overestimate toxicity."
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-04-18 and 2008-01-28
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129208
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Dicofol
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. LOE 66605 has been replaced by LOE 221662 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129208, Dicofol
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221662
 
Pollutant: Dicofol
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dicofol.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Dicofol is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 4.4 ug/L for a fish (chronic).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129222
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Dimethoate
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: Previously considered water quality data was reevaluated according to new guidelines as part of this assessment. Line of evidence #66607 was replaced by #221483.

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 129222, Dimethoate
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221483
 
Pollutant: Dimethoate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dimethoate.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129225
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Ethoprop
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.

LOE 66613 has been replaced by LOE 222063 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129225, Ethoprop
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222063
 
Pollutant: Ethoprop
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ethoprop.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129209
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Glyphosate
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy.

Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy).

The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy.

Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 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.

LOE 66614 has been replaced by LOE 221790 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
LOE 66615 has been replaced by LOE 221879 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129209, Glyphosate
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221879
 
Pollutant: Glyphosate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 6
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_CRC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Glyphosate.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants for California Rice Commission, 2004-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Glyphosate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 11900 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520CRCLCF)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2009-04-28 and 2009-09-15
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission.
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 129209, Glyphosate
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221790
 
Pollutant: Glyphosate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 12
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Glyphosate.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Glyphosate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 11900 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129210
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Linuron
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.

LOE 66620 has been replaced by LOE 221816 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129210, Linuron
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 221816
 
Pollutant: Linuron
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Linuron. Although a total of 16 samples were collected, 16 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Linuron is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.09 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC).
Temporal Representation: Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2007-02-09 to 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129220
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Methidathion
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. LOE 66622 has been replaced by LOE 222053 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark
 
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 129220, Methidathion
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222053
 
Pollutant: Methidathion
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methidathion.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Methidathion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.66 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129217
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Methiocarb
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy.

Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy).

The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy.

Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. 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.

LOE 66623 has been replaced by LOE 222083 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129217, Methiocarb
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222083
 
Pollutant: Methiocarb
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methiocarb.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Methiocarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 2.75 ug/L for a invertebrate (chronic).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129211
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Molinate
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.

LOE 66627 has been replaced by LOE 222123 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129211, Molinate
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222123
 
Pollutant: Molinate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Molinate.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 Department of Fish and Wildlife hazard assessment instantaneous criterion (1-hour average) for the protection of aquatic life for Molinate is 13 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: Hazard Assessment of the Rice Herbicides Molinate and Thiobencarb to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. Administrative Report 90-1. California Department of Fish and Game, Environmental Services Division
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2007-12-20
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129218
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Oryzalin
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: Previously considered water quality data was reevaluated according to new guidelines as part of this assessment. Line of evidence #66630 was replaced by #222173.

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 129218, Oryzalin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222173
 
Pollutant: Oryzalin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oryzalin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Oryzalin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 13 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129223
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Oxyfluorfen
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.

LOE 66631 has been replaced by LOE 222220 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129223, Oxyfluorfen
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222220
 
Pollutant: Oxyfluorfen
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxyfluorfen.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Oxyfluorfen is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.29 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2007-12-20
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129226
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Pendimethalin
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.

LOE 66634 has been replaced by LOE 222118 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. LOE 66635 has been replaced by LOE 222119 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129226, Pendimethalin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222118
 
Pollutant: Pendimethalin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 6
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_CRC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Pendimethalin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants for California Rice Commission, 2004-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Pendimethalin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 5.2 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520CRCLCF)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2009-04-28 and 2009-09-15
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission.
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 129226, Pendimethalin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222119
 
Pollutant: Pendimethalin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Pendimethalin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Pendimethalin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 5.2 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2007-12-20
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129227
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Phorate
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.

LOE 66636 has been replaced by LOE 222260 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129227, Phorate
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222260
 
Pollutant: Phorate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phorate.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129229
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Phosmet
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. LOE 66637 has been replaced by LOE 222225 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark
 
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 129229, Phosmet
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222225
 
Pollutant: Phosmet
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phosmet.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Phosmet is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129212
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Prometon (Prometone)
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. LOE 66638 has been replaced by LOE 222113 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129212, Prometon (Prometone)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222113
 
Pollutant: Prometon (Prometone)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Prometon.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Prometon (Prometone) is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 98 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129221
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Prometryn
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.

LOE 66639 has been replaced by LOE 222231 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129221, Prometryn
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222231
 
Pollutant: Prometryn
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Prometryn.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Prometryn is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.04 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129213
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Propanil (DCPA mono- and di-acid degrad)
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.

LOE 66640 has been replaced by LOE 222277 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129213, Propanil (DCPA mono- and di-acid degrad)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222277
 
Pollutant: Propanil (DCPA mono- and di-acid degrad)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 2
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_CRC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Propanil.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants for California Rice Commission, 2004-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Propanil (DCPA mono- and di-acid degrad) is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 9.1 ug/L for a fish (chronic).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520CRCLCF)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2009-06-03 and 2009-07-08
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission.
 
 
DECISION ID
129224
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Propargite
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.

LOE 66641 has been replaced by LOE 222323 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129224, Propargite
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222323
 
Pollutant: Propargite
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Propargite.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Propargite is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 7 ug/L for a invertebrate (chronic).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2007-12-20
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129230
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Propazine
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.

LOE 66642 has been replaced by LOE 222363 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129230, Propazine
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222363
 
Pollutant: Propazine
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Propazine.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Propazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 24.8 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129214
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Simazine
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.

LOE 66645 has been replaced by LOE 222484 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129214, Simazine
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222484
 
Pollutant: Simazine
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Simazine.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Simazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 6 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129219
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Tebuthiuron
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 3.1 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 sixteen samples exceed the evaluation guideline. LOE 66646 has been replaced by LOE 222506 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of sixteen samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 129219, Tebuthiuron
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222506
 
Pollutant: Tebuthiuron
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Tebuthiuron.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Tebuthiuron is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 50 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2008-09-17
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129231
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Thiobencarb
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:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 129231, Thiobencarb
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222455
 
Pollutant: Thiobencarb
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Thiobencarb.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2007-12-20
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
129215
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Trifluralin
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.

LOE 66649 has been replaced by LOE 222514 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.
 
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 129215, Trifluralin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 222514
 
Pollutant: Trifluralin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SVWQC data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Trifluralin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins).
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 evaluation guideline for Trifluralin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.9 ug/L for a fish (chronic).
Guideline Reference: OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (520XLRLNC)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-02-09 and 2007-12-20
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90756
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Aldrin
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 15 samples exceed the criterion maximum concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion maximum concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 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 90756, Aldrin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66584
 
Pollutant: Aldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater for aldrin is 1.5 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
94672
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Ammonia as N, Total
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 94672, Ammonia as N, Total
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 78997
 
Pollutant: Ammonia as N, Total
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Sixteen water samples collected by the Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition from Lurline Creek (Colusa County) were analyzed for ammonia, pH and temperature. None of the 16 ammonia results exceeded the calculated ammonia CMC values.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants for Goose Lake Coalition, 2007-2009.
 
SWAMP Data:
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The 1-hour average concentration (acute criterion or CMC) of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg N/L) for freshwater where salmonid fish are present, which is not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average, is calculated using the following equation: CMC=0.275/(1+10^(7.204 - pH)) + 39.0/(1+10^(pH - 7.204)).
Guideline Reference: National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology
 
Spatial Representation: Data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at one monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC].
Temporal Representation: Water samples were collected approximately monthly between 2/9/2007 and 9/17/2008
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data collected under the QAPP for the Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86447
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples exceed the criteria.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86447, Arsenic
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66586
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 0.150 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90758
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)
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 zero samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 zero samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90758, Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66588
 
Pollutant: Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos methyl.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 National Recommended Water Quality criterion for Azinphos Methyl (Guthion) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is a maximum of 0.01 ug/l.
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 for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
100388
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Benomyl
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 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 100388, Benomyl
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66589
 
Pollutant: Benomyl
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Benomyl.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 California Department of Fish and Wildlife instantaneous criterion (1-hour average) for Benomyl is 8.8 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: Hazard Assessment of the Fungicides Benomyl, Captan, Chlorothalonil, Maneb, and Ziram to Aquatic Organisms
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90816
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Boron
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 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for AGR.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for AGR and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90816, Boron
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 79497
 
Pollutant: Boron
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Agricultural Supply
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Boron.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
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: 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: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
86535
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples exceed the criteria.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86535, Cadmium
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66592
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The cadmium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
85984
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Carbaryl
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85984, Carbaryl
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66593
 
Pollutant: Carbaryl
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Carbaryl.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 USEPA recommended water quality criterion for freshwater aquatic life for carbaryl is 2.1 µg/L.
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 for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90817
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Carbofuran
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 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90817, Carbofuran
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66594
 
Pollutant: Carbofuran
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Carbofuran.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 freshwater criterion maximum concentration for carbofuran is 0.5 µg/L (DFG 92-3, 1992).
Guideline Reference: Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Carbofuran to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
91786
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Chlorpyrifos
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from one line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this waterbody segment and pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that the none of 15 water sample results exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of 15 water sample results exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.1 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1.
5. 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 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 91786, Chlorpyrifos
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66595
 
Pollutant: Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 freshwater criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic organisms is 0.015 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000).
Guideline Reference: Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game (with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86023
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa 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 section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the three samples exceed the CTR criteria.

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 CTR criteria 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 86023, Chromium
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66596
 
Pollutant: Chromium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 4/18/2007-6/20/2007.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86058
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa 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. Zero of the 16 samples exceed the CTR criteria.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the CTR criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86058, Copper
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66597
 
Pollutant: Copper
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Copper.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90818
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Cyanazine
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 14 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 14 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90818, Cyanazine
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66598
 
Pollutant: Cyanazine
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 14
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Cyanazine.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 EC50 for Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom) for cyanazine is 4.8 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database).
Guideline Reference: OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90870
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
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 zero samples exceed the water quality objective (CTR, 2000) criterion for REC-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. Zero of zero samples exceed the water quality objective (CTR, 2000) criterion for REC-1 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 90870, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 78836
 
Pollutant: DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Water Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: The DDD method detection limit for all 30 analyzed sample results collected from Lurline Creek (Colusa County) are greater than the criterion; therefore, the data could not be assessed with the accuracy required by the Listing Policy.
Data Reference: Data for Metals and Nutrients for the City of Anderson, 2006-2008.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007) Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000), for Inland Surface Waters based on drinking water and aquatic organism consumption. The criteria are based on human health protection for carcinogenicity at 1-in-a-million risk level (30-day average) with a limit of 0.00083 ug/L for DDD
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: National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Fifteen water samples were collected from Lurline Creek (Colusa County) [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]. Each sample was analyzed for both DDD(o,p') and DDD(p,p'), for a total of 30 individual sample results. The DDD(o,p') and DDD(p,p') sample results for each sample date were totaled before they were assessed.
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected on fifteen seven dates approximately monthly between 2/09/2007 and 9/17/2008
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The data was collected under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
86093
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
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 the zero samples 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 zero samples 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 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 86093, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 78888
 
Pollutant: DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Water Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: The DDE method detection limit for all 30 analyzed sample results collected from Lurline Creek (Colusa County) are greater than the criterion; therefore, the data could not be assessed with the accuracy required by the Listing Policy.
Data Reference: Data for Metals and Nutrients for the City of Anderson, 2006-2008.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Sacramento/San Joaquin River Basin Plan (CVRWQCB, 2007) Pesticides: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer.- California Toxics Rule Criteria (USEPA, 2000), for Inland Surface Waters based on drinking water and aquatic organism consumption. The criteria are based on human health protection for carcinogenicity at 1-in-a-million risk level (30-day average) with a limit of 0.00059 ug/L for DDE
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: National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Fifteen water samples were collected from Lurline Creek (Colusa County) [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]. Each sample was analyzed for both DDE(o,p') and DDE(p,p'), for a total of 30 individual sample results. The DDE(o,p') and DDE(p,p') sample results for each sample date were totaled before they were assessed.
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected on fifteen seven dates approximately monthly between 2/09/2007 and 9/17/2008
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The data was collected under the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
90871
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 90871, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66599
 
Pollutant: DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agvaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane).
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The DDT criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.001 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90872
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Demeton
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 nine samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 nine samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90872, Demeton
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66603
 
Pollutant: Demeton
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 9
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Demeton.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 USEPA Recommended Water Aquatic Life criterion continuous concentration for demeton in freshwater is 0.1 ug/L.
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 for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-1/28/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
93931
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This waterbody segment and pollutant combination is being considered for listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from one line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this waterbody segment and pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that the none of 15 water sample results exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of 15 water sample results exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.1 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1.
5. 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.
 
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 93931, Diazinon
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66604
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 freshwater chronic criterion value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004).
Guideline Reference: Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90927
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 90927, Dieldrin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66606
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Dieldrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90928
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Disulfoton
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 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90928, Disulfoton
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66609
 
Pollutant: Disulfoton
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Disulfoton.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 USEPA National Recommended Water Quality criterion for disulfoton in freshwater (0.05 ug/L) is an aquatic life maximum (instantaneous) level.
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 for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86096
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Diuron
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86096, Diuron
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 78583
 
Pollutant: Diuron
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support. None of the 16 sample results were detected at levels above the Diuron criterion of 1.3 ug/L.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline: Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:105-141. The acute exposure (4-day average) value for Diuron is 1.3 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:105-141.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at one monitoring site: [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected approximately monthly between 2/9/2007 and 9/17/2008
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
75966
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Endosulfan sulfate
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 the 15 samples exceed the CTR criteria.

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 15 samples exceeded the CTR criteria 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 75966, Endosulfan sulfate
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66610
 
Pollutant: Endosulfan sulfate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agvaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan sulfate.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The endosulfan sulfate criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.028 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90929
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Endrin
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 90929, Endrin
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66611
 
Pollutant: Endrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Endrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.036 ug/L. (California Toxics Rule, 2000)
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
91109
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 zero samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 zero samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 91109, Heptachlor
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66616
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Heptachlor criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90611
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor epoxide
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 zero samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) objective for COLD.

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 zero samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) objective for COLD 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 90611, Heptachlor epoxide
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66617
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Heptachlor Epoxide criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
91204
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Indicator Bacteria
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 3.2 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. Three of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for REC-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. Three of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for REC-1 and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 91204, Indicator Bacteria
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66612
 
Pollutant: Escherichia coli (E. coli)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Water Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-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 and San Joaquin River Basins).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004
 
Evaluation Guideline: The USEPA recommended objective for single sample maximum allowable density of E. coli in freshwater designated beach areas is 235 MPN/100mL.
Guideline Reference: Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86128
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Lead
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples exceed the CTR criteria.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the CTR criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86128, Lead
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66618
 
Pollutant: Lead
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Lead.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90668
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 15 samples exceed the criterion maximum concentration (CTR, 2000) objective for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion maximum concentration (CTR, 2000) objective for COLD 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 90668, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66619
 
Pollutant: Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The gamma-HCH (Lindane) criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.95 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
77656
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Malathion
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 the 15 samples 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 15 samples 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 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 77656, Malathion
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66621
 
Pollutant: Malathion
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Malathion.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Malathion, 0.028 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).
Guideline Reference: OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86188
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Methomyl
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86188, Methomyl
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66624
 
Pollutant: Methomyl
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Methomyl.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 Evaluation Guideline used to assess freshwater aquatic life exposure to Methomyl is 0.5 µg/L (4-day average) (Menconi & Beckman, 1996).
Guideline Reference: Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methomyl to Aquatic Organisms in the San Joaquin River System
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90734
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Methoxychlor
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 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90734, Methoxychlor
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66625
 
Pollutant: Methoxychlor
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Methoxychlor.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the Executive Officer (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 for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90848
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Methyl Parathion
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 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90848, Methyl Parathion
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66626
 
Pollutant: Methyl Parathion
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Methyl.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 California Department of Fish and Game instantaneous aquatic life criterion for Methyl Parathion is 0.08 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Environmental Services Division. Administrative Report 92-1
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90907
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: N-(4-Chlorophenyl) -N' methylurea / Monuron
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 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 90907, N-(4-Chlorophenyl) -N' methylurea / Monuron
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66628
 
Pollutant: N-(4-Chlorophenyl) -N' methylurea / Monuron
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Monuron.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for monuron, 330 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50 = 3,300 ug/L) for Lepomis gibbosus (Pumpkinseed sunfish). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)
Guideline Reference: OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86189
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Nickel
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 16 samples exceed the CTR criteria.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the CTR criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86189, Nickel
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66629
 
Pollutant: Nickel
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
91262
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa 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 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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 17 samples were not less than the water quality objective for COLD.

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 17 samples were not less than the water quality objective for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 91262, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66632
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 17
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data to determine beneficial use support: None of 17 sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
  Data for Various Pollutants for California Rice Commission, 2004-2009.
 
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 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 [Lurline Creek at 99W-520XLRLNC].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected intermittently and monthly between 2/9/2007 and 6/18/2009.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan for California Rice Commission.
 
 
DECISION ID
90908
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Parathion
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 zero samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 zero samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 90908, Parathion
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66633
 
Pollutant: Parathion
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Ethyl.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 USEPA national ambient water quality chronic criterion (4-hour maximum) for parathion, is 0.013 µg/L, is for freshwater aquatic life.
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 for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
86750
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Selenium
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 16 samples exceed the CTR.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 16 samples exceeded the CTR and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 86750, Selenium
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66643
 
Pollutant: Selenium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
87389
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Silver
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 CTR.

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 CTR 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 87389, Silver
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66644
 
Pollutant: Silver
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Silver.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 4/18/2007-6/20/2007.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
91201
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Thiobencarb/Bolero
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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD.

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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective for COLD 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 91201, Thiobencarb/Bolero
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66647
 
Pollutant: Thiobencarb/Bolero
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Thiobencarb.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb, 1.4 ug/L, is a MATC calculated for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)
Guideline Reference: OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-12/20/2007.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
91202
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Toxaphene
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 zero samples exceed criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) objective for COLD.

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 zero samples exceed criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) objective for COLD 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 91202, Toxaphene
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66648
 
Pollutant: Toxaphene
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Toxaphene.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Toxaphene criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0002 ug/L. (California Toxics Rule, 2000)
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-8/19/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
94674
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
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 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 17 water samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Ceriodaphnia dubia, total cell count of Selenastrum capricornutum and survival of Pimephales promelas. Also, zero of 4 sediment samples exhibited significant toxicity to Hyalella azteca.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of 17 water samples exhibited significant toxicity and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 94674, Toxicity
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 59197
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 17
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Seventeen samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. None of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Ceriodaphnia dubia, total cell count of Selenastrum capricornutum and survival of Pimephales promelas. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided).
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: 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. 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. This data set reports a simple pass/fail (Yes/No) code to report toxicity that is equivalent to the SWAMP SL code.
Guideline Reference: Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms. Fourth Edition. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. EPA-821-R-02-013
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at Lurline Creek at 99W.
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected from April 2007 to September 2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality Assurance Project Plan Guidelines For Order NO. R5-2009-0875 Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition Monitoring And Reporting Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 94674, Toxicity
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 59198
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Sediment
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 4
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Four samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. None of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Hyalella azteca. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided).
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: 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. 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. 4th ed
 
Evaluation Guideline: Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted using the significant effect code: S equals significant, SG equals significantly greater and SL equals significantly lower. If a sample has any one of these codes, it will be considered an exceedance.
Guideline Reference: Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected atLurline Creek at 99W.
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected from April 2007 to August 2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality Assurance Project Plan Guidelines For Order NO. R5-2009-0875 Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition Monitoring And Reporting Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
93542
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa 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. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the California Toxics Rule (CTR) criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater for COLD.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of sixteen samples exceed the California Toxics Rule (CTR) criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater for COLD and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 93542, Zinc
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66650
 
Pollutant: Zinc
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 16
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agwaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90757
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 90757, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66585
 
Pollutant: alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agvaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Endosulfan I criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.
 
 
DECISION ID
90815
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
Pollutant: beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)
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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD.

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 15 samples exceed the criterion continuous concentration (CTR, 2000) for COLD 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 90815, beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)
Region 5     
Lurline Creek (Colusa County)
 
LOE ID: 66590
 
Pollutant: beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 15
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed agvaiver data for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan II.
Data Reference: Data for Various Pollutants in Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition, 2005-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Endosulfan II criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).
Objective/Criterion 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
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for Lurline Creek (Colusa County) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Lurline Creek at 99W - 520XLRLNC]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected over the time period 2/9/2007-9/17/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan for Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition.