| Water Body Name: | ONeill Forebay |
| Water Body ID: | CAL5423103220000209134612 |
| Water Body Type: | Lake & Reservoir |
DECISION ID |
164413 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Reason for Delisting: | Flaws in original listing |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three out of three samples exceeded the objective for the COMM beneficial use. There is insufficient information to determine if fishing occurs at this waterbody; therefore, beneficial use support for COMM cannot be determined at this time. If new information is submitted during subsequent cycles, this assessment may be revised. However, the exceedances of the evaluation guideline indicate that beneficial uses may be threatened. This decision may be reevaluated in the next Integrated Report cycle as more data and information become available. Additional data and information may include information demonstrating that fishing is occurring in this waterbody. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three out of three samples exceeded the objective for the COMM beneficial use. There is insufficient information to determine if fishing occurs at this waterbody; therefore, beneficial use support for COMM cannot be determined at this time. If new information is submitted during subsequent cycles, this assessment may be revised. However, the exceedances of the evaluation guideline indicate that beneficial uses may be threatened. This decision may be reevaluated in the next Integrated Report cycle as more data and information become available. Additional data and information may include information demonstrating that fishing is occurring in this waterbody. 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68429 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in fish tissue is 2.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195639 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls). Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). Of these, 1 species (Common Carp) exceeded the water quality threshold. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in fish tissue is 2.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195442 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls). Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total PCB Arochlor concentration of 500 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68428 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for PCB, Total. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total PCB was assessed for as follows: PCB aroclors and congeners were summed separately and the sum that yielded the highest result was used for the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total PCB concentration of 500 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
DECISION ID |
169320 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Mercury |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| TMDL Priority: | Low |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.4, 4.5, and 4.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.4 and 4.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Under section 4.11 when all other delisting factors do not result in the delisting of a water segment but information indicates attainment of standards, a water segment shall be evaluated to determine whether the weight of evidence demonstrates that water quality standard is attained. If the weight of evidence indicates attainment, the water segment shall be removed from the CWA section 303(d) List. The COMM beneficial use has not been designated to this waterbody. However, OEHHA issued a Health Advisory for O'Neill Forebay in 2017 for mercury. The advisory includes consumption recommendations for black bass species, which were the same fish species sampled in all 4 LOEs. The data were also collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) to monitor pollutants in fish tissue for the purpose of evaluating risks to human health from consumption. And as seen in 3 out of 4 LOEs, the data exceeds the allowable threshold according to section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Data were collected as recent as 2015 and 3 out of 4 samples exceed the allowable frequency based on table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. The weight of evidence of the data and information indicate water quality standards are not attained. 4 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess the pollutant. LOEs 31057 and 68426 are replaced with LOE 226000. LOE 226000 is a reassessment of the same data following the statewide mercury objectives adopted in 2017. COMM beneficial use (sport fish objective): LOE 226121: 1 of 1 samples exceed the mercury objective and consist of 4 trophic level 4 fish. Fish lengths are within CDFW length limits. LOE 226000: 0 of 1 samples exceed the mercury objective and consist of 10 trophic level 4 fish. Fish lengths are within CDFW length limits. LOE 223552: 1 of 1 samples exceed the mercury objective and consist of 13 trophic level 4 fish. Fish lengths are within CDFW length limits. LOE 223726: 1 of 1 samples exceed the mercury objective and consist of 7 trophic level 4 fish. Fish lengths are within CDFW length limits. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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. Tissue samples were compared with the sport fish objective and 3 of 4 samples exceed for the COMM beneficial use. The samples consist of trophic level 4 fish and are from a minimum of 2 annual averages and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. A minimum of 3 annual averages based on composite fish tissue samples must meet the standard to indicate attainment of the standard. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 223552 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 4 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 13 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (13 composite(s) of Largemouth Bass each composed of 1 fish per composite). Of these annual averages, 1 average(s), (Year(s): 2015) exceeded the objective.This LOE does not contain data from fish who's average length was outside of the legal size limits as described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishing Regulations. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing beneficial comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 226121 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| 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 Fish Mercury Project data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 4 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 4 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (4 composite(s) of Largemouth Bass each composed of 1 fish per composite). Of these annual averages, 1 average(s), (Year(s): 2007) exceeded the objective.This LOE does not contain data from fish who's average length was outside of the legal size limits as described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishing Regulations. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | ||||
| 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. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing beneficial comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2007-05-30 and 2007-05-30. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality: Excellent. Quality Control for all of the elements described in section 6.1.4 of the Policy was conducted in accordance with the Laboratory QAPP developed by Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML, 2005). This data was also collected and analyzed in accordance with the CALFED Mercury Project QAPP (Puckett and van Buuren, 2000). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 226000 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 4 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 10 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (10 composite(s) of Largemouth Bass each composed of 1 fish per composite). This LOE does not contain data from fish who's average length was outside of the legal size limits as described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishing Regulations. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | ||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing beneficial comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2007-09-06 and 2007-09-06. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 223726 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Wildlife Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 4 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 7 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (7 composite(s) of Largemouth Bass each composed of 1 fish per composite). Of these annual averages, 1 average(s), (Year(s): 2012) exceeded the objective.This LOE does not contain data from fish who's average length was outside of the legal size limits as described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishing Regulations. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Tissue data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing beneficial comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2012-09-20 and 2012-09-20. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164417 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1, 3 -dichlorobenzene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79806 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1, 3 -dichlorobenzene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 3-Dichlorobenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The 1, 3-Dichlorobenzene criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 400 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164418 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1, 4 -dichlorobenzene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80037 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1, 4 -dichlorobenzene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 4-Dichlorobenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 1, 4-Dichlorobenzene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 5 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164420 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79784 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 1, 2-Trichloroethane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The 1, 1, 2-Trichloroethane criterion for the protection of human health from consumption of water and organisms is 0.60 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164396 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,2-Dichloroethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. 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: | 79794 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,2-Dichloroethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: Although a total of 78 samples were analyzed, 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 2-Dichloroethane. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The 1, 2-Dichloroethane criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.38 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164398 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,2-Dichloropropane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79800 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,2-Dichloropropane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 2-Dichloropropane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The 1, 2-Dichloropropane criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.52 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
171077 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80043 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 2, 4-D. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 2, 4-D incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 70 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
171097 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Alachlor |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80066 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Alachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Alachlor. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for alachlor incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 2 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
171098 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Aldicarb |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80076 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldicarb | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Aldicarb. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Department of Public Health archived advisory level for aldicarb is 7 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | CDPH Archived Advisory Levels for Drinking Water. Archived Advisory Levels are currently considered Notification Levels. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164419 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79819 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for Oneill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: Although a total of 21 samples were analyzed, 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Aldrin criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.00013 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68395 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Aldrin. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Aldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79820 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Aldrin criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 1.5 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 194980 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aldrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Aldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
171072 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Atrazine |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79992 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Atrazine | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Atrazine. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for atrazine incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 1 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164390 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Benzene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80000 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benzene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Benzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Benzene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 1 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164391 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Bromoform |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79829 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Bromoform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Bromoform. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Bromoform criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 4.3 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164392 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Carbon Tetrachloride |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of 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: | 79835 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Carbon Tetrachloride | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The carbon tetrachloride criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.25 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164393 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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: | 68400 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in fish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195558 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total Chlordanes. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in fish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68399 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Chlordane, Total. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Chlordane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195511 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total Chlordanes. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Chlordane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164394 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorobenzene (mono) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80007 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorobenzene (mono) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorobenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for monochlorobenzene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 70 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164395 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Chloroform |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80009 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloroform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Chloroform. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for total trihalomethanes incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 80 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
169225 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. 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: | 195485 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD). Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total DDT concentration of 1000 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68432 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for DDT, Total. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total DDT concentration of 1,000 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68433 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample (which exceed the evaluation guideline) consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in fish tissue is 15 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195513 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD). Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in fish tissue is 15 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164399 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). There is insufficient information to determine if fishing occurs at this waterbody; therefore, beneficial use support for COMM cannot be determined at this time. If new information is submitted during subsequent cycles, this assessment may be revised. Additional data and information may include information demonstrating that fishing is occurring in this waterbody. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195037 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dieldrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Dieldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68406 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One composite sample (which exceed the evaluation guideline) consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish. Another composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 largemouth bass; however, the reporting limit for the composite sample exceed evaluation guideline value and, therefore, the largemouth bass composite sample was not assessed. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). One sample was not used 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. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in fish tissue is 0.32 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68405 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Dieldrin. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Dieldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79846 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for Oneill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: Although a total of 19 samples were analyzed, 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Dieldrin criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.00014 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79847 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Dieldrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195032 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Waterboard staff assessed SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: Zero of Zero samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dieldrin. Although data was collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite), all 2 sample(s) had to be thrown out due to quantitation issues. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in fish tissue is 0.32 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164400 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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: | 195014 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endosulfan. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endosulfan, Total concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195092 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endosulfan. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in fish tissue is 13,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164401 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80028 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan sulfate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criterion to protect freshwater aquatic life from acute (24-Hour average) exposure to Endosulfan sulfate is 0.056 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79881 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan sulfate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Endosulfan Sulfate criterion to protect human health for waters that include the designated use of MUN is 110 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164402 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Endrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). There is insufficient information to determine if fishing occurs at this waterbody; therefore, beneficial use support for COMM cannot be determined at this time. If new information is submitted during subsequent cycles, this assessment may be revised. Additional data and information may include information demonstrating that fishing is occurring in this waterbody. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195155 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195151 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68414 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68407 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Endrin. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79900 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Endrin criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.76 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79902 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | "Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. 0 of 10 samples exceed the WARM criterion for Endrin.
A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results for nine samples were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. ""When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis.""" |
||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Endrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.036 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
125452 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Previously considered water quality data was reevaluated according to new guidelines as part of this assessment. Line of evidence #80029 was replaced by #215034. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 215034 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Esfenvalerate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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 chronic concentration goal for Esfenvalerate is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of Esfenvalerate were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Esfenvalerate | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins for the Control of Pyrethroid Pesticide Discharges | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164404 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Ethylbenzene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80031 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ethylbenzene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Ethylbenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Ethylbenzene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 300 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
171074 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Glyphosate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80032 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Glyphosate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Glyphosate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Glyphosate incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 700 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164405 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. |
| 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: | 79937 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: Although a total of 21 samples were analyzed, 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Heptachlor criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0019 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68415 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Heptachlor. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79934 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. However, because the sample results were below the method detection limit they could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Heptachlor criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.00021 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195380 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Heptachlor. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164406 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. |
| 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: | 79950 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Heptachlor Epoxide criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.00010 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68416 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Heptachlor epoxide. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor Epoxide concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195339 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Heptachlor Epoxide. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor Epoxide concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195182 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Waterboard staff assessed SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: Zero of Zero samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Heptachlor Epoxide. Although data was collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite), all 2 sample(s) had to be thrown out due to quantitation issues. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in fish tissue is 0.93 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1999) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79957 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Heptachlor Epoxide criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68422 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One composite fish tissue sample was generated from 5 largemouth bass; however, since the evaluation guideline exceed the reporting limit, the sample was not assessed. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). One sample was not used 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. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in fish tissue is 0.93 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off fillets. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
DECISION ID |
164407 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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: | 68423 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in fish tissue is 2.8 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195216 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Hexachlorobenzene. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in fish tissue is 2.8 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
164408 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobutadiene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. |
| 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: | 79963 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Hexachlorobutadiene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Hexachlorobutadiene criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.44 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164409 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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: | 68424 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for HCH, gamma. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Lindane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68425 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for lindane in fish tissue is 4.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195235 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for HCH, gamma-. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for lindane in fish tissue is 4.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 195233 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm 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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for HCH, gamma-. Data were collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Lindane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
171093 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Metolachlor |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80047 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Metolachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Metolachlor. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The National Ambient Water Quality Criteria, Human Health and Welfare Protection, Public Health Effects (other than cancer effects) Water & Fish Consumption for metolachlor is 44 µg/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164410 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Mirex |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2020) |
| 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: | 195517 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Waterboard staff assessed SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: Zero of Zero samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mirex. Although data was collected for 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 5 fish per composite), all 2 sample(s) had to be thrown out due to quantitation issues. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquaticlife that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in fish tissue is 0.28 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1992) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 541POF104_SWAMP. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2015-07-14 and 2015-07-14. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68427 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One composite fish tissue sample was generated from 5 largemouth bass; however, since the evaluation guideline exceed the reporting limit, the sample was not assessed. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). One sample was not used 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. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in fish tissue is 0.28 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off fillets. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
DECISION ID |
171076 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Molinate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80051 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Molinate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Molinate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Molinate incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 20 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164414 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Selenium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of 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: | 68431 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One composite fish tissue sample, consisting of fillets from 5 channel catfish, was assessed. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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 OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for selenium in fish tissue is 7.4 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A bacKground dietary consumption rate of 0.114 mg/day is applied for this micronutrient. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on 5/30/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
DECISION ID |
171078 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Simazine |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80070 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Simazine | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Simazine. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Simazine incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 4 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164415 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Toluene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80077 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toluene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Toluene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Toluene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 150 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
164416 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. |
| 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: | 79985 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Toxaphene criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0002 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79983 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The Toxaphene criterion for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 0.00073 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164397 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68396 | ||||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | SWAMP data indicates that 0 of two sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Endosulfan I. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated: one from channel catfish and one from largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Endosulfan concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79855 | ||||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | |||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | California Toxics Rule criteria for alpha-endosulfan to protect human health for waters that include the designated use of MUN is 110 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79856 | ||||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | |||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The endosulfan I criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68397 | ||||
| Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two composite fish tissue samples were assessed. One composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 channel catfish, and one composite sample consisted of fillets from 5 largemouth bass. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA | ||||
| Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007- March 2008 | |||||
| Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008 | |||||
| Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | 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 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 modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in fish tissue is 13,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 Kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of one is applied for skin-off. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for ONeill Forebay was collected at one monitoring site [ O'Neill Forebay - 541POF104]. Samples were collected from two locations. Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: June 2007-March 2008" (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/30/2007-9/6/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments | ||||
DECISION ID |
164412 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Zero samples exceeded the objectives, guidelines, or criteria for beneficial uses applicable to this water segment-pollutant combination, which is less than the minimum number of exceedances needed to place the water segment on the section CWA section 303(d) List for toxicants (Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy). The data used satisfies the data quality requirements (section 6.1.4) and data quantity requirements (section 6.1.5) of the Listing Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79870 | ||||
| Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan II. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | The endosulfan II criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.028 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79869 | ||||
| Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan II. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (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: | California Toxics Rule criteria for beta-endosulfan to protect human health for waters that include the designated use of MUN is 110 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline 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 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
164411 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | o-Dichlorobenzene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | LOEs for this waterbody-pollutant combination from previous cycles were reviewed, determined to be inaccurate, and removed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the MUN water Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the MUN water Objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80030 | ||||
| Pollutant: | o-Dichlorobenzene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 2-Dichlorobenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 1, 2-Dichlorobenzene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 600 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
99934 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1, 1-dichloroethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Criteria/Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79995 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1, 1-dichloroethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 1-Dichloroethane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 1, 1-Dichloroethane incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 5 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
76420 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1, 2-Dibromoethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded Criteria/Objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80019 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1, 2-Dibromoethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support.aA total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for ethylene dibromide (EDB) incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 0.05 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
92271 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Criteria/Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79991 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 1, 1, 1-Trichloroethane incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 200 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
68684 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Criteria/Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79998 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 1, 2, 4-Trichlorobenzene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: At a minimum, water designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The MCL for 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene is 0.005 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
91539 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded Criteria/Objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80014 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 1, 2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane(DBCP) incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 0.20 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
99846 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 29 samples exceed the guideline for MUN and 0 of 19 samples exceed the guideline for WARM. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 29 samples exceed the guideline for MUN and 0 of 19 samples exceed the guideline for WARM and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80059 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 2,4,5-TP. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for 2,4,5-TP, 2,900 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50). The LC50 for 2,4,5-TP is 29,000 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ecotoxicity database. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80057 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 29 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for 2,4,5-TP. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for 2, 4, 5-TP (Silvex) incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 50 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
91600 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Aldicarb sulfoxide |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79990 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldicarb sulfoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Aldicarb sulfoxide. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA drinking water standard (primary MCL) for aldicarb sulfoxide is 4 ug/L | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aldicarb and Aldicarb Metabolites Technical Report. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
91708 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded Evaluation Guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 79996 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for Oneill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: Although a total of 21 samples were analyzed, 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos methyl. The sample results were below the method detection limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for Azinphos Methyl (Guthion) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is a maximum of 0.01 ug/l. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
86193 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Carbaryl |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 19 samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceed the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80004 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Carbaryl | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Carbaryl. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA recommended water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life for carbaryl is 2.1 µg/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
91916 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Carbofuran |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 water samples exceed the MUN water quality objective and zero of zero water samples exceed the WARM evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 water samples exceed the MUN water quality objective and zero of zero water samples exceed the WARM evaluation guideline, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80006 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Carbofuran | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater criterion maximum concentration for carbofuran is 0.5 µg/L (DFG 00-6, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80005 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Carbofuran | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Carbofuran. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Carbofuran incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 18 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92072 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorodibromomethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Criteria/Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80020 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorodibromomethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Dibromochloromethane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for total trihalomethanes incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 80 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
99845 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of 19 samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of 19 samples exceed the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80010 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic organisms is 0.015 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92173 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Cyanazine |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80016 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyanazine | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Cyanazine. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The EC50 for cyanazine is 4.8 (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/18/2004 8:11:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92174 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Demeton |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80017 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Demeton | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Demeton. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA Recommended freshwater eaquatic life criteria for demeton is 0.1 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
86195 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 19 samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceed the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80018 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater chronic value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92175 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorobromomethane |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 19 water samples exceed the MUN water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 water samples exceeded the MUN water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80002 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorobromomethane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Bromodichloromethane. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for total trihalomethanes incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 80 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92329 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Dinoseb |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the MUN water Criteria/Objective, zero of the 19 samples exceed the WARM water Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceed the MUN water Criteria/Objective, zero of 19 samples exceed the WARM water Evaluation Guideline, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80025 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dinoseb | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Dinoseb. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Dinoseb incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 7 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80026 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dinoseb | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Dinoseb. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for dinoseb, 4.4 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50). The LC50 for dinoseb is 44 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ecotoxicity database. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92330 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded Criteria/Objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80027 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for disulfoton is 0.05 µg/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
73718 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Methomyl |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 0 samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 0 samples exceed the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80042 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methomyl | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The criteria for freshwater autic life for methomyl is 0.5 µg/L (Finlayson, 2004). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92026 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Methoxychlor |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the MUN water Criteria/Objective, zero of the zero samples exceed the WARM water Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceed the MUN water Criteria/Objective, zero of the samples exceed the WARM water Evaluation Guideline, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80044 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methoxychlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Methoxychlor. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Methoxychlor incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 30 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80045 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methoxychlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support. A total of 19 samples were analyzed. The sample results were all below the reporting limit and could not be used in the assessment because they do not meet the Quantification of Chemical Concentrations requirements in section 6.1.5.5 of the Listing Policy. "When the sample value is less than the quantitation limit and the quantitation limit is greater than the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis." | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national ambient water quality criterion for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for methoxychlor is 0.03 µg/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92077 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80060 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Methyl. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA National Recommended Water Quality maximum instantaneous criterion for freshwater aquatic life protection from acute exposure to Methyl Parathion is 0.08 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92131 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Parathion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80058 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Parathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Ethyl. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA recommended freshwater aquatic life criteria (chronic) for parathion ethyl is 0.013 µg/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
86313 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 75 samples exceed the objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 75 samples exceed the objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68435 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 75 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 75 averages of Turbidity data in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) in this data set yielded no exceedences. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Sacramento/San Joaquin Basin Plan (2011): For Delta waters, the general objectives for turbidity apply subject to the following: except for periods of storm runoff, the turbidity of Delta waters shall not exceed 50 NTUs in the waters of the Central Delta and 150 NTUs in other Delta waters. The 50 NTU objective was used to assess the data for this water body. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the KA007089 station. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately once a month from February 2004 to June 2010. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | N/A | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
92124 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 19 samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 19 samples exceeded the Criteria/Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 80012 | ||||
| Pollutant: | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Region 5 - Central Valley Region staff assessed DWR data for ONeill Forebay to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for cis-1, 2-Dichloroethene. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin Basins is 6 ug/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin 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: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for ONeill Forebay was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Ca Aqueduct, Ck 13, O'Neill Outlet] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/16/2004 8:45:00 AM-6/15/2010 7:30:00 AM. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Project Plan for Bryte Chemical Laboratory | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Bryte Chemical Laboratory. | ||||
DECISION ID |
92132 |
Region 5 |
ONeill Forebay |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Five of the 75 samples exceed the Criteria/Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Five of 75 samples exceeded the Criteria/Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 68430 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 75 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 5 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Five of the 75 samples exceeded the objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, and Pesticides in Regions 2,5 and 6, 2004-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 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. 4th ed | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the KA007089 station. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately once a month from February 2004 to June 2010. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | N/A | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||