| Water Body Name: | Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
| Water Body ID: | CAR5430001020190806026820 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
121474 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 186179 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Alkalinity as CaCO3. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 levels were assessed for the protection of freshwater aquatic life by comparison to the Evaluation Guideline value of 20,000 ug/L (4 day average)(National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 186174 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Alkalinity as CaCO3. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 levels were assessed for the protection of freshwater aquatic life by comparison to the Evaluation Guideline value of 20,000 ug/L (4 day average)(National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121450 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Anthracene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195846 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Anthracene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Anthracene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Anthrazene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Anthracene is 845 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121451 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195850 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Arsenic . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Arsenic from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Arsenic is 33 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
131582 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| 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: | Benthic Community Effects are being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, additional lines of evidence (LOEs) associating the Benthic Community Effects decision with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants other than benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment or habitat assessment LOEs are necessary to place a water body on the 303(d) List for Benthic Community Effects. One line(s) of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data is/are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. One of one benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. However, a minimum of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples are needed to assess listing status. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this waterbody segment on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of one benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. The available information is insufficient to determine whether the waterbody/pollutant combination should be placed on the 303(d) List of impaired waters at this time. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 231902 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 544R01049 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.267509163 to 0.267509163. | ||||
| Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2020 Integrated Report for Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 5 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station 544R01049. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 4/20/2015 to 4/20/2015. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data collected following BASMAA Regional Monitoring Program protocols. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121453 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195830 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Benz(a)anthracene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Benz[a]anthrazene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Benz[a]anthrazene is 1050 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121452 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195813 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Benzo(a)pyrene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Benzo[a]pyrene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Benzo[a]pyrene is 1450 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121472 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Bifenthrin |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195900 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Bifenthrin . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for bifenthrin, 0.043 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.43 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.43 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for bifenthrin from Amweg et al. (2005) and Amweg and Weston (2007). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121454 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195886 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cadmium . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Cadmium from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Cadmium is 4.98 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121455 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195988 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Chlordane. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Chlordane from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Chlordane is 17.6 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121456 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chloride |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 187236 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chloride. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for chloride incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 250 mg/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 187564 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chloride. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for chloride incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 250 mg/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121478 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chromium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196084 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Chromium . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Chromium from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Chromium is 111 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121457 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196036 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Chrysene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Chrysene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Chrysene is 1290 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121458 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Copper |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196019 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Copper . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Copper from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Copper is 149 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121475 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196229 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cyfluthrin, total. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for cyfluthrin, 0.11 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 1.1 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1.1 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for cyfluthrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121477 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196265 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cyhalothrin, Total lambda-. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for lambda-cyhalothrin, 0.044 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.44 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.44 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for lambda-cyhalothrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121473 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cypermethrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196093 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cypermethrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cypermethrin, Total . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for cypermethrin, 0.03 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.3 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.3 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for cypermethrin from Maund et al. (2002). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126679 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196104 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Sum DDD from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Sum DDD is 28 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126680 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196272 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Sum DDE from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Sum DDE is 31.3 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126752 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196925 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Total DDTs from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Total DDTs is 572 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196094 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Sum DDT from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Sum DDT is 62.9 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121476 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Deltamethrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196414 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Deltamethrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Deltamethrin . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for deltamethrin, 0.079 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.79 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.79 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for deltamethrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121459 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196552 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dieldrin . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Dieldrin from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Dieldrin is 61.8 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121460 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Endrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196405 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Endrin . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Endrin from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Endrin is 207 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121479 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196537 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate, Total. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate, 0.15 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 1.5 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1.5 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121461 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Fluoranthene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196782 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Fluoranthene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Fluoranthene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Fluoranthene is 2230 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121462 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Fluorene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196804 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fluorene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Fluorene. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Fluorene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Fluorene is 536 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121463 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Lead |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196764 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Lead . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Lead from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Lead is 128 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121464 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| 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: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196660 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for HCH, gamma-. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Lindane from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Lindane is 4.99 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
130911 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Mercury |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196906 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Mercury . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Mercury from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Mercury is 1.06 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121465 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Naphthalene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196645 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Naphthalene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| 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 BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Naphthalene. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Naphthalene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Naphthalene is 561 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121466 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nickel |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196731 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nickel . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Nickel from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Nickel is 48.6 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126717 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 192016 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Primary Maximum Contaminant Level for Nitrate as N incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 10 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 192154 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Primary Maximum Contaminant Level for Nitrate as N incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 10 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126718 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 192501 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Primary Maximum Contaminant Level for Nitrite as N incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 1000 ug/L . | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 191973 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Primary Maximum Contaminant Level for Nitrite as N incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 1000 ug/L . | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
125187 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. A total of four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of one of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use and one of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the fish spawning beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. A total of one of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use and one of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the fish spawning beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 207714 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as SPWN is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 207713 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 207753 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as SPWN is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 208243 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126707 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196814 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Total PAHs from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Total PAHs is 22800 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
130446 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Permethrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196920 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Permethrin, Total . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for permethrin, 0.89 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 8.9 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 8.9 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for permethrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121467 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Phenanthrene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196964 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Phenanthrene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Phenanthrene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Phenanthrene is 1170 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121468 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Pyrene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196979 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Pyrene . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Pyrene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Pyrene is 1520 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121471 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Pyrethroids |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 197068 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pyrethroids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Pyrethroids . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for the protection of aquatic life from pyrethroids is one toxic unit. Individual pyrethroid concentrations in sediment were normalized to organic carbon content, divided by the respective 1/10 LC50 and then summed. A sum over over one toxic unit is an exceedance of the evaluation guideline (Amweg et al. 2006). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Pyrethroid insecticides and sediment toxicity in urban creeks from California and Tennessee. Environmental Science and Technology, 40(5): 1700-1706 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Compilation of freshwater OC-normalized sediment toxicity data for pyrethroids | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
126488 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity |
| 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 212231 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for SpecificConductivity. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin for specific conductance is 900 uS/cm. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 211590 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for SpecificConductivity. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin for specific conductance is 900 uS/cm. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
125189 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of the 2samples exceed the OBJECTIVE for COLD, Fish Migration, and Fish Spawning. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of the 2samples exceed the OBJECTIVE for COLD, Fish Migration, and Fish Spawning and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 213303 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 212687 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Migration | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 212372 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Migration | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 212926 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 212446 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 212531 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121470 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Zinc |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 196974 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Zinc . | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 for Zinc from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Zinc is 459 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 544R00025. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-07-25 to 2012-07-25 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
125188 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 209893 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 209892 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 210452 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 209446 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Shellfish Harvesting | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 209872 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 209469 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Shellfish Harvesting | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 209894 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2015 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R01049) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-20 and 2015-04-20 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 210456 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 data for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (544R00025) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-15 and 2012-05-15 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
121469 |
Region 5 |
Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2035 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the three water samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Selenastrum capricornutum, Pimephales promelas, Hyalella azteca, Ceriodaphnia dubia. One of one sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use. The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Hyalella azteca. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of the three water samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the COLD beneficial use and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195716 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 1 of the 2 samples collected by BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results, but will only be counted once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day, at the same location with the same lab sample ID (if provided). The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Selenastrum capricornutum, for Total Cell Count, Pimephales promelas, for Survival, Pimephales promelas, for Biomass (wt/orig indiv), Hyalella azteca, for Survival, Ceriodaphnia dubia, for Survival, Ceriodaphnia dubia, for Young/female | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 5 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 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 (parametric Dunnett's Test or non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon Two-sample Test). The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012 | ||||
| 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 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 544R00025 ) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-03-17 and 2012-07-25. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195718 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 1 of the 1 samples collected by BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2013 for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results, but will only be counted once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day, at the same location with the same lab sample ID (if provided). The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Hyalella azteca, for Survival | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 5 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 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 (parametric Dunnett's Test or non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon Two-sample Test). The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012 | ||||
| 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 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 544R00025 ) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2013-04-04 and 2013-04-04. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195715 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 1 of the 1 samples collected by BASMAA RMC Monitoring in WY2012 for Dry Creek (Contra Costa County, partly in Delta Waterways, western portion) exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results, but will only be counted once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day, at the same location with the same lab sample ID (if provided). The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Hyalella azteca, for Growth (wt/surv indiv), Hyalella azteca, for Survival | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| 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. | ||||
| 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 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 544R00025 ) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-25 and 2012-07-25. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | BASMAA Regional Monitoring Coalition Creek Status and Pesticides & Toxicity Monitoring Quality Assurance Project Plan | ||||