Pollutant: |
Aluminum |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153727, Aluminum
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
312657 |
|
Pollutant: |
Aluminum |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
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 STORET data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. |
Data Reference: |
WQX data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for aluminum incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins is 0.2 mg/L assessed as an annual average. |
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: CA_BVR-PC1 (Putah Creek). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-03-10 and 2016-03-10 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
STORET |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153727, Aluminum
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
314554 |
|
Pollutant: |
Aluminum |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
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 STORET data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. |
Data Reference: |
WQX data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. |
Guideline Reference: |
Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: CA_BVR-PC1 (Putah Creek). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-03-10 and 2016-03-10 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Pollutant: |
Chloride |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153724, Chloride
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
313327 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chloride |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed USGS California Water Science Center data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for Chloride. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
Data Reference: |
WQ data from the federal Water Quality Portal (WQP) assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for chloride of 250 - 500 mg/L assessed as an annual average. |
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: USGS-11453500 (PUTAH C NR GUENOC CA). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-02-27 and 2017-02-27 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
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: |
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 148753, Mercury
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
292200 |
|
Pollutant: |
Mercury |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed USGS California Water Science Center data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. |
Data Reference: |
WQ data from the federal Water Quality Portal (WQP) assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The mercury criteria for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.050 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: USGS-11453500 (PUTAH C NR GUENOC CA). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-02-27 and 2017-02-27 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 148753, Mercury
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
292199 |
|
Pollutant: |
Mercury |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
|
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 USGS California Water Science Center data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. |
Data Reference: |
WQ data from the federal Water Quality Portal (WQP) assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The mercury criteria for the protection of human health from consumption of organisms only is 0.051 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: USGS-11453500 (PUTAH C NR GUENOC CA). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-02-27 and 2017-02-27 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
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: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153779, Specific Conductivity
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
313399 |
|
Pollutant: |
Specific Conductivity |
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 USGS California Water Science Center data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for SpecificConductivity. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
Data Reference: |
WQ data from the federal Water Quality Portal (WQP) assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for specific conductance of 900 - 1600 uS/cm assessed as an annual average. |
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: USGS-11453500 (PUTAH C NR GUENOC CA). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-02-27 and 2017-02-27 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Pollutant: |
Sulfates |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153725, Sulfates
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
313440 |
|
Pollutant: |
Sulfates |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed USGS California Water Science Center data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for Sulfate. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
Data Reference: |
WQ data from the federal Water Quality Portal (WQP) assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 5. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for sulfate of 250 - 500 mg/L assessed as an annual average. |
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: USGS-11453500 (PUTAH C NR GUENOC CA). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-02-27 and 2017-02-27 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153725, Sulfates
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
312948 |
|
Pollutant: |
Sulfates |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for Sulfate. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
Data Reference: |
WQX 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 into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for sulfate of 250 - 500 mg/L assessed as an annual average. |
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: CA_BVR-PC1 (Putah Creek). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-03-10 and 2016-03-10 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
STORET |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
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: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 148035, Temperature, water
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
292509 |
|
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 USGS California Water Science Center data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. |
Data Reference: |
WQ data from the federal Water Quality Portal (WQP) assembled for the 2024 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: USGS-11453500 (PUTAH C NR GUENOC CA). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-02-27 and 2017-02-27 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Pollutant: |
Total Dissolved Solids |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 153726, Total Dissolved Solids
|
Region 5 |
Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
313314 |
|
Pollutant: |
Total Dissolved Solids |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Putah Creek, Upper (Lake and Napa Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for Total Dissolved Solids. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
Data Reference: |
WQX 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 into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for total dissolved solids of 500 - 1000 mg/L assessed as an annual average. |
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: CA_BVR-PC1 (Putah Creek). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-03-10 and 2016-03-10 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
STORET |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|