Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
|
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 160759, Oxygen, Dissolved
|
Region 5 |
Red Peak Fork (Madera County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
330007 |
|
Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* data for Red Peak Fork (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. |
Data Reference: |
WQX from the NWQMP for the 2026 Integrated Report in Region 5 |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as COLD is 7.0 mg/L. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin Basin) |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: ADVENTURESCIENTISTS-37.71.119.36 (Red Peak Fork (Merced River)-37.71.119.36). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2021-06-29 and 2021-06-29 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Adventure Scientists 2020 QAPP |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Adventure Scientists - Adventure Scientists QAPP - Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* - 402638 |
|
Pollutant: |
Specific Conductivity |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 165484, Specific Conductivity
|
Region 5 |
Red Peak Fork (Madera County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
330271 |
|
Pollutant: |
Specific Conductivity |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* data for Red Peak Fork (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for SpecificConductivity. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
Data Reference: |
WQX from the NWQMP for the 2026 Integrated Report in Region 5 |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for specific conductance of 900-1600 uS/cm assessed as an annual average. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: ADVENTURESCIENTISTS-37.71.119.36 (Red Peak Fork (Merced River)-37.71.119.36). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2021-06-29 and 2021-06-29 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Adventure Scientists 2020 QAPP |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Adventure Scientists - Adventure Scientists QAPP - Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* - 402638 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
|
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 160761, Temperature, water
|
Region 5 |
Red Peak Fork (Madera County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
330485 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* data for Red Peak Fork (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. |
Data Reference: |
WQX from the NWQMP for the 2026 Integrated Report in Region 5 |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin Plans). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). |
Guideline Reference: |
Inland Fishes of California |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: ADVENTURESCIENTISTS-37.71.119.36 (Red Peak Fork (Merced River)-37.71.119.36). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2021-06-29 and 2021-06-29 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Adventure Scientists 2020 QAPP |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Adventure Scientists - Adventure Scientists QAPP - Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* - 402638 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
|
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 160760, pH
|
Region 5 |
Red Peak Fork (Madera County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
330088 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* data for Red Peak Fork (Madera County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. |
Data Reference: |
WQX from the NWQMP for the 2026 Integrated Report in Region 5 |
|
SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Sacramento River Basin and San Joaquin River Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: ADVENTURESCIENTISTS-37.71.119.36 (Red Peak Fork (Merced River)-37.71.119.36). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2021-06-29 and 2021-06-29 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
Adventure Scientists 2020 QAPP |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Adventure Scientists - Adventure Scientists QAPP - Adventure Scientists (Volunteer)* - 402638 |
|