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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 5 - Central Valley Region

Water Body Name:	Main Drainage Canal
Water Body ID:	CAR5204000020041130180509
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	74176	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

Pollutant:	Diuron
Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Reason for Delisting:	Applicable WQS attained; according to new assessment method
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 of the Listing Policy. Under this section 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. LOE 95326 replaces LOE 22175 for this assessment. LOE 95326 re-assesses data previously evaluated in LOE 22175 according to a new evaluation guideline. One of the 11 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for WARM. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for 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. A new evaluation guideline is available to interpret the narrative toxicity objective. 4. Data previously used to support the decision to place this water segment ¿ pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List have been reevaluated according to a new evaluation guideline. 5. One of 11 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for WARM and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 6. 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:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74176, Diuron	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

22175

Pollutant:

Diuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

4 water samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal from January to February 2006, representing 4 concentrations.2 of 4 available concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration of 1.3 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

Monitoring and Reporting Program, Order Nos. R5-2003-0826, R5-2005-0833, and R5-2008-0005 for Coalition Groups Under Resolution No. R5-2003-0105, Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges From Irrigated Lands Within the Central Valley Region

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 (CVRWQCB, 2007).All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).

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 Board will use the best available technical information to evaluate compliance with the narrative objectives. Other available technical information on the pesticide (such as Lowest Observed Effect Concentrations and No Observed Effect Levels), the water bodies and organisms involved will be evaluated to determine if lower concentrations are required to meet the narrative objectives. (CRWQCB, 2006).The 96 hour EC50 for the most sensitive species, Chlorella pyrenoidosa is 1.3 ug/L (ECOTOX, 2008 and Ma et al. 2001).

Guideline Reference:

Ecotox database

Guideline Reference:

Acute toxicity of 33 herbicides to the green alga Chlorella pyrenoidosa. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 66:536-541. Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal at Colusa Highway

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected two days in January 2006 and two days in February 2006

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74176, Diuron	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

95327

Pollutant:

Diuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Nine water samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal from June to November 2007 representing 9 concentrations. Zero out of 9 available samples exceeded the maximum concentration of 1.3 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Monitoring Discharges from Irrigated Lands - Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Final Report: Activities from 2004-2007

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CVRWQCB, 2007). All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal or aquatic life (CVRWQCB, 2007).

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:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216: 105-141. Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Diuron, 1.3 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average.

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:105-141.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal at Colusa Highway.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected monthly or bimonthly from June to November 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74176, Diuron	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

95326

Pollutant:

Diuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four water samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal from January to February representing two 4-day average concentrations. One out of two 4-day average concentrations exceeded the maximum concentration of 1.3 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:105-141.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal at Colusa Highway.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected over two days in January (1/15/2006-1/16/2006) and two days in February (2/27/2006-2/28/2006) and averaged using a 4-day average per the evaluation guideline resulting in two averaged concentrations.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	92517	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

Pollutant:	Diazinon
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with action other than TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with action other than TMDL)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Agriculture
Expected Attainment Date:	2026
Implementation Action Other than TMDL:	This water body segment-pollutant combination is being addressed through Basin Plan requirements established under CRWQCB-CVR resolution R5-20140041, and implemented through Board established Waste Discharge Requirements for agricultural discharges. The sources of diazinon to this segment have been identified as offsite movement of diazinon from diazinon applications by the agricultural dischargers regulated by the CRWQCB-CVR WDRs. The Basin Plan identifies numeric water quality objectives for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. The Basin Plan and WDRs require growers to implement management practices through the development and implementation of water quality management plans to meet water quality objectives for diazinon as soon as possible but no longer than ten years from the date of approval of the Basin Plan Amendment. These management plans are required to be developed and implemented within one year of the Basin Plan Amendment approval. Agricultural management practices to be implemented may include pest management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management practices and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diazinon into surface water. The Basin Plan and the Monitoring and Reporting programs in the WDRs require monitoring to determine if adequate reductions are being attained. The Basin Plan and WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until the water quality objectives are achieved.
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This water body - pollutant combination is being considered for removal from the 303(d) list under sections 2.2 and 4.11 of the Listing Policy. No new data or information was available for the 2014 cycle. Under section 4.11, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The evidence indicates that diazinon concentrations are not attaining the applicable water quality standards, but existing pollution control requirements, under State authority, are stringent enough to implement applicable water quality standards because the impairment is being addressed by an enforceable regulatory program, other than a TMDL, that is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standards within a reasonable, specified time frame. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Fifty-one of 98 available water sample results exceed the water quality objective for aquatic freshwater habitat (WARM or COLD). 4. In addition, one of 11 available calculated 4-day average diazinon concentrations exceeded the 4-day average diazinon criterion. This exceedance did not occur more than once every three years. Two of 40 available 1-hour average diazinon concentrations exceeded the 1-hour average diazinon criterion. These exceedances occurred more than once every three years. 5. The sources of diazinon to this water body segment have been identified as offsite movement of diazinon from diazinon applications by the agricultural dischargers, who are regulated under enforceable Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). 6. In 2016, the Board adopted Resolution R5-2014-0041 establishing Basin Plan amendments that primarily address the regulation of agricultural pesticide runoff and discharges of diazinon and chlorpyrifos in the Central Valley which are implemented through Board established Waste Discharge Requirements for agricultural dischargers. The amendments established numeric water quality objectives for diazinon and a control program to ensure that the objectives will be attained within a reasonable, specified time frame. The Basin Plan and WDRs require growers to implement management practices through the development and implementation of water quality management plans to meet water quality objectives for diazinon as soon as possible but no longer than ten years from the date of approval of the Basin Plan Amendment. These management plans are required to be developed and implemented within one year of the Basin Plan Amendment approval. 7. Agricultural management practices to be implemented may include pest management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management practices and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diazinon into surface water. 8. The Basin Plan and the Monitoring and Reporting programs in the Boards WDRs require monitoring to determine if adequate reductions are being attained. The Basin Plan and WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until the water quality objectives are attained. 9. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information described in the lines of evidence associated with this decision, the Regional Water Board determined that this water body and pollutant combination is still impaired and that it should be listed as being addressed by another regulatory program that is reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame because an alternative State regulatory program is in place which can be reasonably expected to result in attainment of the water quality standard within a reasonable, specified time frame.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:	The Basin Plan and WDRs require growers to implement management practices through the development and implementation of water quality management plans to meet water quality objectives for diazinon as soon as possible but no longer than ten years from the date of approval of the Basin Plan Amendment. These management plans are required to be developed and implemented within one year of the Basin Plan Amendment approval. 7. Agricultural management practices to be implemented may include pest management practices, pesticide application practices, vegetation management practices and water management practices, all of which are effective in reducing offsite movement of diazinon into surface water. 8. The Basin Plan and the Monitoring and Reporting programs in the Boards WDRs require monitoring to determine if adequate reductions are being attained. The Basin Plan and WDRs require management practices to be iteratively improved through updates of the management plans until the water quality objectives are attained. 9. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met.

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 92517, Diazinon	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

2680

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

156

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Samples were analyzed using ELISA, GC/MS Arvada, CO. One hundred fifty-six total samples were collected. Forty-six of the ELISA samples could not be used because the quality of the data was questionable. Fifty of 98 samples exceeded the guideline (Dileanis et al., 2002; Dileanis, 2003a; Dileanis, 2003b; Holmes et al., 2000).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. Discharges shall not result in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses. Total identifiable persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides shall not be present in the water column at concentrations detectable within the accuracy of analytical methods approved by the Environmental Protection Agency or the executive Officer. Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the Maximum Contaminant Levels set forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Pesticide concentrations shall not exceed those allowable by applicable antidegradation policies (see State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 68-16 and 40 C.F.R. Section 131.12). Pesticide concentrations shall not exceed the lowest levels technically and economically achievable. A trend in declining water quality has not been established per the Policy in section 3.1.10.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

CDFG Hazard Assessment Criteria - acute value: 0.10 ug/L, chronic value: 0.16 ug/L (Siepman & Finlayson, 2000; Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at the Main Drainage Canal at Gridley Road.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as follows: 1/2000 - 10 on 1/30 and 1/31; 2/2000 - 34 samples with as many as 6/day; 1/2001 - 18 averaging 5/day; 2/2001 - 20 averaging 6/day; 1/2002 - 16 averaging 3/day; 2/2002 - 15 2-4/day; 3/2002 for 6 consecutive days. Eighteen samples were also collected in 1/1994 and 2/1994.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data from USGS reports are considered of adequate quality per section 6.1.4 of the Policy.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 92517, Diazinon	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

22246

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

35 water samples were collected from Main Drain from January to February 2003, representing 8 4-day average concentrations and 35 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 8 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.10 ug/L. 1 of 35 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Zipped file of Central Valley Waterways Pesticide TMDL monitoring data spreadsheets and reports

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criteria - 0.160 ug/L 1-hour average and 0.100 ug/L 4-day average concentration not to be exceeded more than once every three years (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000 and Finlayson, 2004).

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:

Samples were collected from Main Drain near Gridley.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected at variable intervals (hourly and daily) from two storm events in January and February 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Calanchini, H. 2006. Quality Assurance Project Plan, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan. Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins and Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta TMDL Monitoring for Organophosphorus Pesticides and Other Pesticides Identified as Posing a High Risk to Surface Waters. Final. SWAMP Project ID 02TM5001 (Revision 0.0). John Muir Institute of the Environment, U.C. Davis. Davis, CA. January 26, 2006

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 92517, Diazinon	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

22248

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

1 Water sample was collected from Main in February 2000, representing 1 4-day average concentrations and 1 1-hour average concentrations.1 of 1 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.10 ug/L. 1 of 1 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Surface Water database (SWDB) for Central Valley waterbodies, 2000-2005

Correspondence between the Department of Pesticide Regulation and Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding water quality data for waterbodies in the Central Valley

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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:

Samples were collected from Main Drain at Colusa Hwy.

Temporal Representation:

The only sample was collected in February 2000.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Minimum requirements for the CDPR Surface Water Database are: Name of the sampling agency or organization, Date that each sample was collected, Date of each sample analysis, County where samples were taken, Detailed sampling location information (including latitude and longitude or township/range/section if available), detailed map or description of each sampling site (i.e., address, cross roads, etc.), Name or description of water body sampled, Name of the active ingredient analyzed for; concentration detected (with unit of measurement), and limit of quantitation, Description of analytical QA/QC plan, or statement that no formal plan exists. Additional optional requirements are included on DPR's webpage at http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/caps/req.htm

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Surface Water Monitoring for Pesticides

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 92517, Diazinon	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

22247

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

4 water samples were collected from Main Drain from January to February 2006, representing 2 4-day average concentrations and 4 1-hour average concentrations.0 of 2 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.10 ug/L. 0 of 4 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.16 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

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:

Samples were collected from Main Drain near Colusa Highway.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected twice in January and twice in February 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	72059	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

Pollutant:	Ammonia
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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. This pollutant was 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 were available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 63 samples exceed the COLD evaluation guideline and zero of the 90 samples exceed the MUN evaluation guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there was 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 was 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 63 samples exceeded the COLD, zero of 90 samples exceeded the MUN 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72059, Ammonia	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

21054

Pollutant:

Ammonia

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

1 of the 63 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Ammonia.

Data Reference:

SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database

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. This objective applies regardless of whether the toxicity is caused by a single substance or the interactive effect of multiple substances. (CRWQCB, 2006)

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:

Ammonia levels should not to exceed the calculated limit. Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection (Salmonid present) Criteria Maximum Concentration (CMC) (1-hour Average (mg N/L)) calculated based on the following formula: CMC = (0.275/(1 + 107.204-pH)) + (39.0/(1 + 10pH-7.204)) which incorporates pH (US EPA, 2005: Appendix C)

Guideline Reference:

1999 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Farris Road North. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Farris Road South. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Ord Ranch Road Lateral E-7. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ South Ave. Lateral E. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ West Biggs/Gridley Road Lateral H.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Dec 7 2000 to Mar 18 2002

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72059, Ammonia	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

21023

Pollutant:

Ammonia

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

0 of the 90 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Ammonia.

Data Reference:

SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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:

Ammonia levels should not exceed 30 mg/L (USEPA Health Advisory).

Guideline Reference:

2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Dec 7 2000 to Mar 18 2002

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	74803	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

Pollutant:	Malathion
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the 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 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. None of 2 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded criterion continuous concentration (CCC) and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. In addition, 0 of 4 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded 1-hour criterion concentration 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:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74803, Malathion	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

22178

Pollutant:

Malathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

4 water samples were collected from Main Drain Canal in January and February 2006, representing 2 4-day average concentrations and 4 1-hour average concentrations.10 of 2 available 4-day average concentrations exceeded the 4-day maximum concentration guideline of 0.1 ug/L.0 of 4 available 1-hour average concentrations exceeded the maximum 1-hour concentration of 0.43 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. 4th ed

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C

Evaluation Guideline:

US EPA recommended criterion continuous concentration (CCC) of 0.1 ug/L (US EPA, 1976). California Department of Fish and Game Hazard Assessment Criterion is 0.43 ug/L for criterion maximum concentration (CMC) (CDFG, 1998)

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Malathion to Aquatic Life in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Office of Spill Prevention and Response Administrative Report 98-2

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Main Drain Canal at Colusa Highway.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected twice in January and in February 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	72994	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. This pollutant was originally considered for listing under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from one line of evidence for this pollutant. None of 92 specific conductivity measurements exceed "recommended" Secondary MCL of 900 uS/cm for electrical conductivity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on 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. None of 92 specific conductivity measurements exceed the "recommended" Secondary MCL of 900 uS/cm for electrical conductivity, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Table 3.2 of the listing policy recommends listing if a sample size of 92 has 16 or more samples that exceed the evaluation criteria. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72994, Specific Conductivity	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

21024

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 92 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the "recommended" Secondary MCL of 900 uS/cm for electrical conductivity

Data Reference:

SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The secondary MCLs for electrical conductivity provide a range of values including a recommended level (900 uS/cm), upper level (1600 uS/cm) and a short-term level (2200 uS/cm). The ¿recommended¿ level of 900 uS/cm was used as it is intended to be protective of all drinking water uses

Objective/Criterion Reference:

California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Main Drain at Colusa Hwy, at Farris Road North, at Farris Road South, at Ord Ranch Road Lateral E-7, at South Ave. Lateral E, and at West Biggs/Gridley Road Lateral H

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between December 7, 2000 and April 10, 2003

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	74656	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

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 section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the samples exceed the 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 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 4 samples had pH values higher than the pH objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 5 samples is needed for application of table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 74656, pH	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

22176

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The Sacramento Valley Water Quality Coalition collected 4 samples from January 2006 to February 2006. One of the 4 samples did not meet the evaluation objective and had a pH higher than 8.5.

Data Reference:

Revised Draft of the 2007 Review of the Monitoring Data for the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Conditional Waiver Program

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH of water shall not be depressed below 6.5,raised above 8.5, or changed at any time more than 0.5 units from normal ambient pH. Measurement of pH within the range of 6.5 and 8.5. A high pH value is greater 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. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Main Drainage Canal at Colusa Highway.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred from January 2006 to February 2006

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality: Good. Monitoring was conducted in accordance with Central Valley Water Board Monitoring and Reporting Program (order number R5-2003-0826) requirements (CVRWQCB, 2003)

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	72058	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

Pollutant:	Oxygen, Dissolved
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed. "This pollutant is being considered for listing under sections 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Data is available from 1 line of evidence for this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that 25 of 86 available concentrations exceeded the water quality objective and this does exceed the allowable frequency using Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. "

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data or information was available during the 2014 Integrated Report cycle to reassess this water body segment and pollutant. The decision has not changed.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 72058, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Main Drainage Canal

LOE ID:

21125

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

25 of the 86 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Dissolved Oxygen.

Data Reference:

SWAMP data entered by SWRCB into BDAT database

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Basin Plan Objective sets the minimum Dissolved Oxygen content at 7 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:

Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Colusa Hwy. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Farris Road North. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Farris Road South. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ Ord Ranch Road Lateral E-7. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ South Ave. Lateral E. Samples were collected at Main Drain @ West Biggs/Gridley Road Lateral H.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Dec 7 2000 to Apr 10 2003

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Monitoring was conducted in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board's Quality Assurance Program Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):