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

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold.

Guideline Reference:

Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms. Fourth Edition. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. EPA-821-R-02-013

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at station 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected in April 2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data quality is good. Data results were recorded in the SWAMP database and followed SWAMP protocols.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118396, Toxicity	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62039

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Ten samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Four of the samples exhibited significant toxicity (Selenastrum capricornutum, Pimephales promelas and Ceriodaphnia dubia. The toxicity tests included survival of Ceriodaphnia dubia, total cell count of Selenastrum capricornutum and survival of Pimephales promelas. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. This data set reports a simple pass/fail (Yes/NO) code to report toxicity that is equivalent to the SWAMP SL code.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected in February 2005, December 2008 and February 2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Collected under the Management Plan South San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118396, Toxicity	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198225

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

1 of the 7 samples collected by SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results, but will only be counted once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day, at the same location with the same lab sample ID (if provided). The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Hyalella azteca, for Survival, Hyalella azteca, for Growth (wt/surv indiv)

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 558CCR010 )

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-22 and 2018-08-09.

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118396, Toxicity	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

21922

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

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:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 11 samples tested with Ceriodaphnia dubia were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective.

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:

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. (CVRWQCB, 2004)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-012

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from four locations: Cross Creek, Cross Creek at Highway 99, Cross Creek at Houston Ave, and Cross Creek at Kansas Ave.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from February 2005 to August 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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 118396, Toxicity	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

21925

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

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:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 11 samples tested with Pimephales promelas were toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective.

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 Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day acute-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from four locations: Cross Creek, Cross Creek at Highway 99, Cross Creek at Houston Ave, and Cross Creek at Kansas Ave.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from February 2005 to August 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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 118396, Toxicity	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

21927

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

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:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four of 11 samples tested with Selenastrum capricornutum was toxic and violated the narrative toxicity objective. Three samples collected at Cross Creek exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample dates and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:27 June 2006 (73)31 July 2006 (77)28 August 2006 (70)One sample collected at Cross Creek at Houston Avenue exhibited a statistically significant decrease in growth compared to the control. The sample date and percent of control (in parentheses) are as follows:27 June 2006 (72)

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 Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 4-day chronic-style toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-013

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from four locations: Cross Creek, Cross Creek at Highway 99, Cross Creek at Houston Ave, and Cross Creek at Kansas Ave.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from February 2005 to August 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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 118396, Toxicity	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

21924

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Only one sample tested with Hyalella azteca survival.

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 Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Statistically significant difference from control using a t-test with 10-day Hyalella azteca sediment toxicity tests.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Sample was collected from Cross Creek at Highway 99.

Temporal Representation:

Sample was collected on November 5,2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

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	128725	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 79316 has been replaced by LOE 222642 and LOE 222622 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128725, 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222622

Pollutant:

2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid, 2,4-.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid) is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 299.2 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

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.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-01-10 and 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128725, 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222642

Pollutant:

2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid, 2,4-.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for 2,4-D (2,4-Dichlorophenoxy acetic acid) is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 299.2 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-02-21 and 2006-04-12

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128739	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62154 has been replaced by LOE 222919 and LOE 222943 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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 128739, Alachlor	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222943

Pollutant:

Alachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Alachlor is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.64 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-07 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128739, Alachlor	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222919

Pollutant:

Alachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Alachlor is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.64 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128740	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62155 has been replaced by LOE 222725 and LOE 222726 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128740, Aldicarb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222726

Pollutant:

Aldicarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Aldicarb. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Aldicarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.46 ug/L for a fish (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-01-10 to 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128740, Aldicarb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222725

Pollutant:

Aldicarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aldicarb. Although a total of 7 samples were collected, 3 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Aldicarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.46 ug/L for a fish (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-02-21 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118374	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118374, Anthracene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198273

Pollutant:

Anthracene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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 for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Anthrazene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Anthracene is 845 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118375	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Arsenic
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118375, Arsenic	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62157

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Arsenic.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for arsenic is 33 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118375, Arsenic	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198277

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Arsenic from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Arsenic is 33 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118375, Arsenic	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62163

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 0.150 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128718	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62164 has been replaced by LOE 222752 and LOE 222751 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128718, Atrazine	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222751

Pollutant:

Atrazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Atrazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of <1 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128718, Atrazine	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222752

Pollutant:

Atrazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Atrazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of <1 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-07 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118377	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Benzo(a)anthracene
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118377, Benzo(a)anthracene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198280

Pollutant:

Benzo(a)anthracene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Benz[a]anthrazene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Benz[a]anthrazene is 1050 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118376	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Benzo(a)pyrene
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118376, Benzo(a)pyrene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198286

Pollutant:

Benzo(a)pyrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Benzo[a]pyrene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Benzo[a]pyrene is 1450 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118399	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Bifenthrin
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the six sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline. One of seven sediment samples exhibited sediment toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for 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. Three of the six sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is sufficient to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. However, there is not sufficient evidence of sediment toxicity as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	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 118399, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198225

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 558CCR010 )

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-22 and 2018-08-09.

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118399, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78562

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for bifenthrin. The two available samples were not used in the assessment because the OC-normalized laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective, the available OC-normalized samples were below the laboratory data reporting limit, and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in pesticide concentrations in bottom sediments or aquatic life that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for bifenthrin in sediment (0.043 ug/g OC), is one-tenth of the geometric mean (0.43 ug/g OC) of the organic carbon-normalized (OC) LC50 values for Hyalella azteca, an amphipod crustacean. The LC50 values were derived by Amweg et al. 2005 and Amweg and Weston 2007.

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Hwy 99 (Revised) 558CCRSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected from 4/21/2009 to 10/14/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118399, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62167

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Bifenthrin.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for bifenthrin, 0.043 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.43 ug/g OC). The LC50 (0.43 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for bifenthrin from Amweg et al. (2005) and Amweg and Weston (2007).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118399, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

215076

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Bifenthrin. 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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 Bifenthrin is 0.1 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of Bifenthrin 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 Bifenthrin

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 Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118399, Bifenthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198288

Pollutant:

Bifenthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 3 of the 5 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Bifenthrin .

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for bifenthrin, 0.043 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.43 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.43 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for bifenthrin from Amweg et al. (2005) and Amweg and Weston (2007).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	128728	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Bromacil
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. LOE 62031 has been replaced by LOE 222818 and LOE 222840 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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 128728, Bromacil	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222840

Pollutant:

Bromacil

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Bromacil.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Bromacil is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 6.8 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-01-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128728, Bromacil	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222818

Pollutant:

Bromacil

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Bromacil.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Bromacil is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 6.8 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-02-21 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118378	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Cadmium
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118378, Cadmium	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62032

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

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

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. 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 and San Joaquin River Basins).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cadmium is 4.98 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118378, Cadmium	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62033

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed AgWaiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The cadmium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118378, Cadmium	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198293

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Cadmium from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Cadmium is 4.98 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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	118379	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118379, Chlordane	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78630

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

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:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support. All five of the sample results are reported at levels below their median detection limit values. Since the method detection limit values are greater than the criterion for Chlordane, the sample results could not be used to determine whether there are any exceedances. 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Chlordane, 0.0043 ug/L, is the CTR for freshwater aquatic life protection from chronic exposure. This criterion is based on 304(a) aquatic life criterion issued in 1980, and was issued in following documents Chlordane (EPA 440/5-80-027.

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at two monitoring sites [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Previous) - 558CCRSP4 and Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected between 1/10/2005 and 7/19/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118379, Chlordane	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198295

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Chlordane from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Chlordane is 17.6 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118379, Chlordane	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62041

Pollutant:

Chlordane

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 1 sample collected exceeded the criteria for chlordane concentration (Sum of trans-Chlordane, cis-Chlordane, cis-Nonachlor, trans-Nonachlor, and Oxychlordane).

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

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. Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affects beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The Probable Effect Concentration for Chlordane in freshwater sediments is 17.6 ug/kg(MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at the following station 558CCR010 (Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	118380	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118380, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62042

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (5 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (1.77 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for chlorpyrifos, 0.177 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 1.77 ug/g OC). The LC50 (1.77 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for chlorpyrifos from Amweg and Weston (2007).

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118380, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62043

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

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 (with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118380, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198298

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 4 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Chlorpyrifos. Although a total of 5 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for chlorpyrifos, 0.177 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 1.77 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample (Amweg and Weston, 2007).

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118380, Chlorpyrifos	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78655

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for chlorpyrifos. The two available samples were not used in the assessment because the OC-normalized laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective, the available OC-normalized samples were below the laboratory data reporting limit, and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for chlorpyrifos in sediment (0.177 ug/g OC), is one-tenth of the geometric mean (1.77 ug/g OC) of the organic carbon-normalized (OC) LC50 values for Hyalella azteca, an amphipod crustacean. The LC50 values were derived by Amweg and Weston (2007).

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected from 4/21/2009 to 10/14/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118404	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Chromium
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118404, Chromium	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62044

Pollutant:

Chromium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Chromium.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for chromium is 111 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118404, Chromium	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198303

Pollutant:

Chromium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Chromium from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Chromium is 111 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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	118381	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Chrysene (C1-C4)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118381, Chrysene (C1-C4)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198305

Pollutant:

Chrysene (C1-C4)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Chrysene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Chrysene is 1290 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118382	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Copper
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 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 118382, Copper	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62045

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Copper.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for copper is 149 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118382, Copper	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62048

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed AgWaiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Copper.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The chromium criterion in freshwater is hardness-dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness-dependent formula for metals criteria.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118382, Copper	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198309

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Copper from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Copper is 149 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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	118401	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Cyfluthrin
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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118401, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214832

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Cyfluthrin, total. 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Evaluation Guideline:

The chronic concentration goal for Cyfluthrin is 0.2 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of Cyfluthrin 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 Bifenthrin

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 Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118401, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62050

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Cyfluthrin, total. 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (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 Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Cyfluthrin, 0.00005 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118401, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62051

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (2 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (1.1 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for cyfluthrin, 0.11 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 1.1 ug/g OC). The LC50 (1.1 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for cyfluthrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118401, Cyfluthrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198312

Pollutant:

Cyfluthrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cyfluthrin, total. Although a total of 5 samples were collected, 4 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for cyfluthrin, 0.11 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 1.1 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1.1 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for cyfluthrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	118403	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Cyhalothrin, Lambda
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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118403, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62053

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (1 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (0.44 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for lambda-cyhalothrin, 0.044 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.44 ug/g OC). The LC50 (0.44 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for lambda-cyhalothrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118403, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198233

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cyhalothrin, Total lambda-. Although a total of 5 samples were collected, 4 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for lambda-cyhalothrin, 0.044 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.44 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.44 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for lambda-cyhalothrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118403, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214833

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two water samples were collected from Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) were analyzed for Cyhalothrin, lambda. The method detection limits for the samples were greater than the water quality criterion; therefore, the sample results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Evaluation Guideline:

The chronic concentration goal for Lambda-cyhalothrin is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of Lambda-cyhalothrin 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 Lambda-cyhalothrin

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 Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on two dates: 7/19/2006 and 6/17/2009

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118403, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62052

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Cyhalothrin, 0.0005 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on two dates: 7/19/2006 and 6/17/2009

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118403, Cyhalothrin, Lambda	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78661

Pollutant:

Cyhalothrin, Lambda

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for cyhalothrin, lambda. The two available samples were not used in the assessment because the OC-normalized laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective, the available OC-normalized samples were below the laboratory data reporting limit, and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for cyhalothrin, lambda in sediment (0.044 ug/g OC), is one-tenth of the geometric mean (0.44 ug/g OC) of the organic carbon-normalized (OC) LC50 values for Hyalella azteca, an amphipod crustacean. The LC50 values were derived by Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected from 4/21/2009 to 10/14/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118400	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Cypermethrin
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118400, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78777

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for cypermethrin. The two available samples were not used in the assessment because the OC-normalized laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective, the available OC-normalized samples were below the laboratory data reporting limit, and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for cypermethrin in sediment (0.03 ug/g OC), is one-tenth of the geometric mean (0.3 ug/g OC) of the organic carbon-normalized (OC) LC50 values for Hyalella azteca, an amphipod crustacean. The LC50 values were derived by Maund et al. (2002).

Guideline Reference:

Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected from 4/21/2009 to 10/14/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118400, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62055

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was not assessed because, after the laboratory method detection limit result was organic carbon-normalized, the result was above the evaluation guideline and, therefore the result could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for cypermethrin, 0.03 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 0.3 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for cypermethrin from Maund et al. (2002).

Guideline Reference:

Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118400, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198236

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for cypermethrin, 0.03 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.3 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.3 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for cypermethrin from Maund et al. (2002).

Guideline Reference:

Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118400, Cypermethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214834

Pollutant:

Cypermethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Cypermethrin, total. 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Evaluation Guideline:

The chronic concentration goal for Cypermethrin is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of Cypermethrin 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 Cypermethrin

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 Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	126669	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126669, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198254

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Sum DDD from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Sum DDD is 28 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126669, DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62056

Pollutant:

DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (28.0 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDD (o,p' + p,p') is 28.0 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	126670	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126670, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198260

Pollutant:

DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Sum DDE from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Sum DDE is 31.3 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126670, DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62057

Pollutant:

DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (31.3 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDE is 31.3 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	126747	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126747, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62058

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (62.9 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for the sum of DDT is 62.9 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126747, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198264

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Sum DDT from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Sum DDT is 62.9 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126747, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198327

Pollutant:

Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Total DDTs from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Total DDTs is 572 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	128719	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Dacthal
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. LOE 79244 has been replaced by LOE 222862 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128719, Dacthal	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222862

Pollutant:

Dacthal

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dacthal is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of >1100 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute) and vascular plant (acute). The benchmark was derived from a \greater-than\" value (for example, > 265,000) and may overestimate toxicity."

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-12-15 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118402	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Deltamethrin
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118402, Deltamethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222619

Pollutant:

Deltamethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Deltamethrin. Although a total of 3 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Deltamethrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0041 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2006-01-03 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118402, Deltamethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62060

Pollutant:

Deltamethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (2 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (0.79 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for deltamethrin, 0.79 ug/g OC, is the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50). The LC50 (0.79 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for deltamethrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118402, Deltamethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62059

Pollutant:

Deltamethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Deltamethrin, 0.02 ug/L, is the maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) for Pimephales promelas (Fathead minnow); USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database.

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118402, Deltamethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198267

Pollutant:

Deltamethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for deltamethrin, 0.079 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 0.79 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.79 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for deltamethrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	118383	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118383, Diazinon	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198237

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 2 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Diazinon. Although a total of 5 samples were collected, 3 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for diazinon, 1.1 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca(LC50; 11 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 11 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for diazinon from Ding et al. (2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118383, Diazinon	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62067

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (5 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (11 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for diazinon, 1.1 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 11 ug/g OC). The LC50 (11 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for diazinon (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118383, Diazinon	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62068

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. Three samples were 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The freshwater chronic criterion 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 Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/19/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128720	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Dichlorvos
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. LOE 79253 has been replaced by LOE 222645 and LOE 222675 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128720, Dichlorvos	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222645

Pollutant:

Dichlorvos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos. Although a total of 5 samples were collected, 5 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0058 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-02-21 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128720, Dichlorvos	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222675

Pollutant:

Dichlorvos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0058 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-01-10 to 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128721	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Dicofol
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. LOE 62069 has been replaced by LOE 222767 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128721, Dicofol	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222767

Pollutant:

Dicofol

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dicofol is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 4.4 ug/L for a fish (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-07-19 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118384	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118384, Dieldrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62071

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Three samples were 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:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118384, Dieldrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198243

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dieldrin from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Dieldrin is 61.8 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118384, Dieldrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62070

Pollutant:

Dieldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (61.8 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for dieldrin is 61.8 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	128734	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Dimethoate
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:	Previously considered water quality data was reevaluated according to new guidelines as part of this assessment. Line of evidence #62077 was replaced by #222831 and #222854. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128734, Dimethoate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222831

Pollutant:

Dimethoate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dimethoate. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-01-10 to 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128734, Dimethoate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222854

Pollutant:

Dimethoate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dimethoate. Although a total of 10 samples were collected, 6 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-02-21 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118385	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 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 118385, Endrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62080

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. Five samples were 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:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118385, Endrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62079

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (207 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for endrin is 207 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118385, Endrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198245

Pollutant:

Endrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Endrin from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Endrin is 207 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	118406	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118406, Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198248

Pollutant:

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate, 0.15 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 1.5 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1.5 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118406, Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62087

Pollutant:

Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (1 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (1.5 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate, 0.15 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 1.5 ug/g OC). The LC50 (1.5 ug/g OC) is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	128735	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Ethoprop
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 128735, Ethoprop	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222895

Pollutant:

Ethoprop

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Ethoprop. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-01-10 to 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128735, Ethoprop	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222896

Pollutant:

Ethoprop

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ethoprop. Although a total of 3 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-02-21 to 2006-04-12

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118405	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Fenpropathrin
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118405, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222682

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Fenpropathrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.06 ug/L for a fish (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-01-10 and 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118405, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198335

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for fenpropathrin, 0.1 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 1 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for fenpropathrin from Ding et al. ( 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118405, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78812

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for fenpropathrin. The two available samples were not used in the assessment because the OC-normalized laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective, the available OC-normalized samples were below the laboratory data reporting limit, and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for fenpropathrin in sediment (0.12 ug/g OC), is one-tenth of the geometric mean (1.2 ug/g OC) of the organic carbon-normalized (OC) LC50 values for Hyalella azteca, an amphipod crustacean. The LC50 values were derived by Ding et al. (2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Hwy 99 (Revised) 558CCRSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected from 4/21/2009 to 10/14/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118405, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62090

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (2 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (1 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for fenpropathrin, 0.1 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; one ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for fenpropathrin (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118405, Fenpropathrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222686

Pollutant:

Fenpropathrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Fenpropathrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.06 ug/L for a fish (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-02-21 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118386	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118386, Fluoranthene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198337

Pollutant:

Fluoranthene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Fluoranthene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Fluoranthene is 2230 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118387	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118387, Fluorene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198342

Pollutant:

Fluorene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Fluorene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Fluorene is 536 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	128722	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62095 has been replaced by LOEs 222711 and 222734 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128722, Glyphosate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222711

Pollutant:

Glyphosate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Glyphosate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 11900 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128722, Glyphosate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222734

Pollutant:

Glyphosate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Glyphosate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 11900 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-07-19 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	126899	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
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. No new fecal coliform data are used in this assessment because the fecal coliform water quality objective was superseded and is no longer used as the basis of any 303(d) List decision for water contact recreation. Therefore, all lines of evidence available for fecal coliform have been retired.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126899, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62081

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA recommended objective for single sample maximum allowable density of E. coli in freshwater designated beach areas is 235 MPN/100mL.

Guideline Reference:

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 2/22/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126899, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

7536

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 1 sample collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for E.Coli Bacteria.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

E.Coli Bacteria levels should not exceed 409 MPN/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA E.Coli Guideline)

Guideline Reference:

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected from Jun 24 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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126899, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

197092

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 3 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all waters, except Lake Tahoe, where the salinity is less than 10 parts per thousand (ppth) 95 percent or more of the time is a STATISTICAL THRESHOLD VALUE (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL not to be exceeded more than 10 percent of the time (calculated monthly).

Objective/Criterion 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

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 558CCR010

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the days of 2011-02-10 and 2011-08-11 .

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126899, Indicator Bacteria	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

7523

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

0 of the 1 sample collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for E.Coli Bacteria.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

E.Coli Bacteria levels should not exceed 235 MPN/100 mL in any single sample (USEPA E.Coli Guideline)

Guideline Reference:

Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected from Jun 24 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	118388	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Lead
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118388, Lead	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62098

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Lead.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for lead is 128 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118388, Lead	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62099

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed AgWaiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Lead.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118388, Lead	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198349

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Lead from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Lead is 128 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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	118389	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118389, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198345

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 2 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for HCH, gamma-. Although a total of 5 samples were collected, 3 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Lindane from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Lindane is 4.99 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118389, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62100

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sediment sample was collected and analyzed for the SWAMP.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Lindane (gamma-HCH) is 4.99 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99 - 558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118389, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62106

Pollutant:

Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. Three samples were 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The gamma-HCH (Lindane) criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.95 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128723	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Linuron
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. LOE 62107 has been replaced by LOE 222885 and LOE 222823 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128723, Linuron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222823

Pollutant:

Linuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Linuron. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Linuron is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.09 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-01-10 to 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128723, Linuron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222885

Pollutant:

Linuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Linuron. Although a total of 7 samples were collected, 7 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Linuron is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.09 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-02-21 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	130906	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Mercury
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130906, Mercury	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62109

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Mercury.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for mercury is 1.06 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130906, Mercury	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198352

Pollutant:

Mercury

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Mercury from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Mercury is 1.06 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	128732	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Methidathion
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. LOE 62110 has been replaced by LOE 222647 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128732, Methidathion	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222647

Pollutant:

Methidathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Methidathion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.66 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-07-19 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128729	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Methiocarb
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. LOE 62117 has been replaced by LOEs 222715 and 222737 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128729, Methiocarb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222715

Pollutant:

Methiocarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Methiocarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 2.75 ug/L for a invertebrate (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-01-10 and 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128729, Methiocarb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222737

Pollutant:

Methiocarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methiocarb.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Methiocarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 2.75 ug/L for a invertebrate (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-02-21 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118390	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118390, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198364

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for methyl parathion, 0.6 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 6 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 6 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for methyl parathion from Ding et al. (2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118390, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62121

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (10 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (6 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for methyl parathion, 0.6 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 6 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for methyl parathion (Ding et al. 2011).

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118390, Methyl Parathion	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62120

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

The California Department of Fish and Game instantaneous aquatic life criterion for Methyl Parathion is 0.08 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Environmental Services Division. Administrative Report 92-1

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128736	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62126 has been replaced by LOE 222763 and LOE 222760 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128736, Metolachlor	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222763

Pollutant:

Metolachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Metolachlor is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-07 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128736, Metolachlor	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222760

Pollutant:

Metolachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Metolachlor is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128737	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Metribuzin
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. LOE 62127 has been replaced by LOE 222849 and LOE 222807 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128737, Metribuzin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222807

Pollutant:

Metribuzin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Metribuzin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 8.1 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128737, Metribuzin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222849

Pollutant:

Metribuzin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Metribuzin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 8.1 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-07 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128724	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62128 has been replaced by LOE 222869 and 222891 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128724, Molinate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222891

Pollutant:

Molinate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife hazard assessment instantaneous criterion (1-hour average) for the protection of aquatic life for Molinate is 13 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Rice Herbicides Molinate and Thiobencarb to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. Administrative Report 90-1. California Department of Fish and Game, Environmental Services Division

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-07 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128724, Molinate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222869

Pollutant:

Molinate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife hazard assessment instantaneous criterion (1-hour average) for the protection of aquatic life for Molinate is 13 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118391	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118391, Naphthalene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198354

Pollutant:

Naphthalene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Naphthalene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Naphthalene is 561 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118392	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Nickel
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118392, Nickel	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62129

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Nickel.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for nickel is 48.6 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118392, Nickel	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62136

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed AgWaiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118392, Nickel	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198358

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Nickel from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Nickel is 48.6 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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	128730	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Oryzalin
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:	Previously considered water quality data was reevaluated according to new guidelines as part of this assessment. Line of evidence #79226 was replaced by #226629 and #222957. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128730, Oryzalin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222957

Pollutant:

Oryzalin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Oryzalin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 13 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-01-03 and 2006-01-03

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128730, Oryzalin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222629

Pollutant:

Oryzalin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Oryzalin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 13 ug/L for a vascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-01-10 and 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	122935	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Oxygen, Dissolved
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 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 122935, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

21923

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

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:

Fifteen samples were taken from Cross Creek between 2003 and 2006. One of the fifteen samples fell below the water quality objective for minimum dissolved oxygen content in surface water.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the Tulare Lake Basin Plan the (COLD) Cold Freshwater Habitat criterion is a Minimum Dissolved Oxygen content of 7mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from Cross Creek in Kings County.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected between June 2003 and August 2006. Samples were collected at monthly intervals.

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 122935, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214638

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB5 Monitoring data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River and San Joaquin Basin: minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as WARM is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCR010)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-10 and 2011-02-10

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122935, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214513

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Sacramento River and San Joaquin Basin: minimum dissolved oxygen concentration for waters designated as WARM is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCR010)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-07-13 and 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122935, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62137

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data to determine beneficial use support: None of six sample results exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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 River Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at two monitoring sites [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised)-558CCRSP4 and Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Previous)-558CCHSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected approximately every two to three months between 1/3/2006 and 8/2/2007.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122935, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

8763

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 1 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for Dissolved Oxygen.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Basin Plan Objective sets the minimum Dissolved Oxygen content at 5 mg/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Jun 24 2003 to Jun 24 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	126705	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 126705, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198362

Pollutant:

PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Total PAHs from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Total PAHs is 22800 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118394	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118394, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

59615

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 0 samples exceeded the guideline. Sample results were 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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 (CVRWQCB, 2004). The total PCB criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.014 ug/L. This value corresponds to the sum of aroclors 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, and 1016 (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples collected at station 558CCRSP4 (Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised)).

Temporal Representation:

Samples collected on 2/22/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118394, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198375

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Total PCBs from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Total PCBs is 676 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118394, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62139

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of 1 sample collected for Total PCBs exceeded the evaluation guideline.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affects beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total PCB is 676 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at the following station 558CCR010 (Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99).

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	128742	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Paraquat
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:	Previously considered water quality data was reevaluated according to new guidelines as part of this assessment. Line of evidence #79338 was replaced by #223053 and #223062. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128742, Paraquat	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223053

Pollutant:

Paraquat

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Paraquat. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Paraquat is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.396 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute) for Paraquat dichloride.

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-08-10 to 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128742, Paraquat	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223062

Pollutant:

Paraquat

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Paraquat. Although a total of 4 samples were collected, 4 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Paraquat is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.396 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute) for Paraquat dichloride.

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2006-04-12 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	130391	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Permethrin
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130391, Permethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78876

Pollutant:

Permethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for permethrin, total. The two available samples were not used in the assessment because the OC-normalized laboratory data reporting limit was above the objective, the available OC-normalized samples were below the laboratory data reporting limit, and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for permethrin in sediment (0.89 ug/g OC), is one-tenth of the geometric mean (8.9 ug/g OC) of the organic carbon-normalized (OC) LC50 values for Hyalella azteca, an amphipod crustacean. The LC50 values were derived by Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected from 4/21/2009 to 10/14/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130391, Permethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214835

Pollutant:

Permethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Permethrin, Total. 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Evaluation Guideline:

The chronic concentration goal for Permethrin is 1 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of Permethrin 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 Permethrin

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 Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130391, Permethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62146

Pollutant:

Permethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample was below both the reporting limit (4 ng/g dry weight) and the organic carbon-normalized evaluation guideline value (8.9 ug/g OC) and could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the listing policy.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline value for permethrin, 0.89 ug/g OC, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration for H. azteca (LC50; 8.9 ug/g OC). The LC50 is the geometric mean of OC-normalized LC50 values for permethrin (Amweg et al. 2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130391, Permethrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198371

Pollutant:

Permethrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain pesticides in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for permethrin, 0.89 ug/g, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50; 8.9 ug/g) and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 8.9 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for permethrin from Amweg et al. (2005).

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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	118393	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118393, Phenanthrene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198318

Pollutant:

Phenanthrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Phenanthrene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Phenanthrene is 1170 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	128738	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Phorate
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. LOE 62147 has been replaced by LOEs 222986 and 222994 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128738, Phorate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222994

Pollutant:

Phorate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phorate. Although a total of 6 samples were collected, 3 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-02-21 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128738, Phorate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222986

Pollutant:

Phorate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Phorate. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-01-10 to 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128741	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Phosmet
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. LOE 62132 has been replaced by LOE 222228 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark

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 128741, Phosmet	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223009

Pollutant:

Phosmet

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Phosmet is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-07-19 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128733	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Prometryn
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. LOE 62149 has been replaced by LOE 223039 and LOE 223042 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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 128733, Prometryn	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223039

Pollutant:

Prometryn

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Prometryn. Although a total of 4 samples were collected, 3 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Prometryn is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.04 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2006-08-07 to 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128733, Prometryn	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223042

Pollutant:

Prometryn

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Prometryn. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Prometryn is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.04 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4).

Temporal Representation:

Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2005-08-10 to 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118395	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118395, Pyrene	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198319

Pollutant:

Pyrene

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Pyrene from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Pyrene is 1520 ug/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2010-09-22

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	118398	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the five sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline. One of seven samples exhibited sediment toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for 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. Three of five sediment samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this sample size is sufficient to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. However, there is not sufficient evidence of sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118398, Pyrethroids	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198321

Pollutant:

Pyrethroids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for the protection of aquatic life from pyrethroids is one toxic unit equivalent. A toxic unit equivalent is equal to the sum of; Bifenthrin, Cyfluthrin, Cypermethrin, Lambda-Cyhalothrin, and Permethrin, each having their reported concentration divided their respective evaluation guideline prior to being summed. If this results in a value greater than one, the sample day is considered to be in exceedance of the water quality standard. (Department of Fish and Game Aquatic Life Criteria for Pyrethroid Insecticides, 2000)

Guideline Reference:

Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5

Guideline Reference:

Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15

Guideline Reference:

Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92.

Guideline Reference:

Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396.

Guideline Reference:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103.

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118398, Pyrethroids	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198225

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Toxicity

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 558CCR010 )

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-22 and 2018-08-09.

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	128726	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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:	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. LOE 62159 has been replaced by LOE 223060 and LOE 223089 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128726, Simazine	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223089

Pollutant:

Simazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Simazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 6 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128726, Simazine	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223060

Pollutant:

Simazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Simazine is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 6 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-07 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128731	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Tebuthiuron
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. LOE 79232 has been replaced by LOEs 223097 and 223088 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

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 128731, Tebuthiuron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223097

Pollutant:

Tebuthiuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Tebuthiuron is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 50 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-01-10 and 2005-01-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128731, Tebuthiuron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223088

Pollutant:

Tebuthiuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Tebuthiuron is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 50 ug/L for a nonvascular plant (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-02-21 and 2006-04-12

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128743	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Thiobencarb
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 128743, Thiobencarb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222991

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCHSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-08-10 and 2005-08-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128743, Thiobencarb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

222981

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed ILRP_SSJWQC data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Thiobencarb.

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-12-15 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	128727	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Trifluralin
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. LOE 62040 has been replaced by LOE 223002 due to a reassessment of data using a U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 128727, Trifluralin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

223002

Pollutant:

Trifluralin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Trifluralin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.9 ug/L for a fish (chronic).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCRSP4)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2005-02-21 and 2009-06-17

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	118397	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Zinc
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118397, Zinc	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62047

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed AgWaiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118397, Zinc	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

198332

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Zinc from MacDonald et al., 2000a which states that the probable effect concentration for Zinc is 459 mg/kg. (dw = Dry Weight)

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected from 1 station(s). Station Code(s): 558CCR010.

Temporal Representation:

Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2010-09-22 to 2018-08-09

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 118397, Zinc	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62046

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

SWAMP data indicates that 0 of the sample results exceed the evaluation guideline value for Zinc.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

In freshwater sediments, the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for zinc is 459 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence was collected at one monitoring site [ Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99558CCR010]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on 4/29/2008.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan


DECISION ID	122936	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

8764

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 1 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation objective for pH. The exceeded results are as follows: 6/24/2003 - a sample taken at Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99 had a result of 9.1-.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

pH levels should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.3 (Basin Plan Objective)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Jun 24 2003 to Jun 24 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):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79362

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for pH.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. 4th ed

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Previous) - 558CCHSP4, Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

21926

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

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:

The Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition collected 10 samples from June 2003 to August 2006. Two out of 10 samples were outside the acceptable range; the two samples were higher than the acceptable range.

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 8.3, or changed at any time more than 0.3 units from normal ambient pH. Measurement of pH within the range of 6.5 and 8.3

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the locations: Cross Creek, Cross Creek at Highway 99, and Cross Creek at Houston Avenue.

Temporal Representation:

Sampling occurred from June 2003 to August 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 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214395

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Stream Pollution Trends data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH.

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Tulare Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCR010)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-07-13 and 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214428

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Tulare Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCR010)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-10 and 2011-02-10

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214643

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Tulare Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCR010)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-07-13 and 2016-07-13

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 122936, pH	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

214619

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Field, Habitat, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region Tulare Basin: pH should not be lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (558CCR010)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-10 and 2011-02-10

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	85556	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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(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 4 sample exceeds 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 4 sample exceeds 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85556, 2,4,5-TP (Silvex)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79321

Pollutant:

2,4,5-TP (Silvex)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for 2,4,5-TP.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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, 2900 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50). The LC50 for 2,4,5,-TP is 29000 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-4/12/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88531	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the six 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 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 six samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88531, Aldrin	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62156

Pollutant:

Aldrin

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater for aldrin is 1.5 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected intermittently between 1/3/2006 and 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88532	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 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 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 zero samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88532, Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62165

Pollutant:

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

The National Recommended Water Quality criterion for Azinphos Methyl (Guthion) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is a maximum of 0.01 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan by the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, Revision 1.0.


DECISION ID	88533	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Benomyl
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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the four 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 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 four samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88533, Benomyl	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79263

Pollutant:

Benomyl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Benomyl.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

According to the USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database, the MATC for Benomyl is 2.2 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-4/12/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88607	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Boron
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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the eight 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 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 eight samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88607, Boron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79355

Pollutant:

Boron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Boron.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

Water Quality for Agriculture, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1985, contains criteria protective of various agricultural uses of water, including irrigation of various types of crops and stock watering. At or below the limits presented in the Water Quality Goals tables, agricultural uses of water should not be limited. These criteria were used to translate narrative water quality objectives for chemical constituents that prohibit chemicals in concentrations that would impair agricultural uses of water. The criteria for boron is 700 ug/L (0.7 mg/L).

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985)

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	68744	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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(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 6 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 6 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 68744, Carbaryl	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62034

Pollutant:

Carbaryl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceed the criterion for Carbaryl.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA recommended water quality criterion for freshwater aquatic life for carbaryl is 2.1 µg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88609	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 three 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 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 three samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88609, Carbofuran	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62035

Pollutant:

Carbofuran

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Carbofuran. Three samples were 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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The freshwater criterion maximum concentration for carbofuran is 0.5 µg/L (DFG 92-3, 1992).

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Carbofuran to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88685	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the six 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 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 six samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88685, Chloroform	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79302

Pollutant:

Chloroform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceed the criterion for Chloroform.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

Evaluation Guideline:

The Chloroform criteria for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is 1240 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-4/12/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88686	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 four 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 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 four samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88686, Cyanazine	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62049

Pollutant:

Cyanazine

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The EC50 for Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom) for cyanazine is 4.8 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 8/7/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88475	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 four 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 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 four samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88475, Dinoseb	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79326

Pollutant:

Dinoseb

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Dinoseb.

Data Reference:

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:

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:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-4/12/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88550	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 one 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 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 one samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88550, Disulfoton	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62078

Pollutant:

Disulfoton

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Disulfoton. Five samples were 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:

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA National Recommended Water Quality criterion for disulfoton in freshwater (0.05 ug/L) is an aquatic life maximum (instantaneous) level.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85893	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Diuron
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. One of 9 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. One of 9 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85893, Diuron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

78564

Pollutant:

Diuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

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:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support. One of the nine sample results were detected at levels above Diuron criterion of 1.3 ug/L.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: III. Diuron. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:105-141. The acute exposure (4-day average) value for Diuron is 1.3 ug/L.

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:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at two monitoring sites: [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4; Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Previous) - 558CCHSP4].

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected approximately quarterly between 1/10/2005 and 6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85894	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 8 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 8 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85894, Endosulfan sulfate	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79361

Pollutant:

Endosulfan sulfate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan sulfate.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The endosulfan sulfate criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.028 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88553	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the water quality criteria. 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. Zero of the zero samples exceed the water quality criteria 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88553, Heptachlor	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62096

Pollutant:

Heptachlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Heptachlor criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88626	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the water quality criteria. 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. Zero of the zero samples exceed the water quality criteria 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88626, Heptachlor epoxide	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62097

Pollutant:

Heptachlor epoxide

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85131	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85131, Malathion	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62108

Pollutant:

Malathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Malathion, 0.028 ug/L, is not exceeded more than once every three years on the average (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criterion).

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85187	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 3 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 3 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85187, Methomyl	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62118

Pollutant:

Methomyl

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Methomyl.

Data Reference:

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The criteria continuous concentration for Methomyl in the San Joaquin River system is 0.5 ug/L (4-day average). (CDFG, 1996)

Guideline Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88768	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 six 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 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 six samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88768, Methoxychlor	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62119

Pollutant:

Methoxychlor

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceed the criterion for Methoxychlor.

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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 (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:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88844	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the three 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 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 three samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88844, Mirex	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79307

Pollutant:

Mirex

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	88922	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Monuron
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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the four 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 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 four samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88922, Monuron	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

79331

Pollutant:

Monuron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

State Water Board staff assessed ILRP data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for Monuron.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

The evaluation guideline for monuron, 330 ug/L, is one-tenth of the median lethal concentration (LC50). The 1/10 LC50 for monuron is 330 ug/L (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-4/12/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	71572	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
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 listing under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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 not sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollution combination on the section 303(d) list. The recommendation is based on staff findings that only 1 sample is available and a minimum of 2 is needed for evaluation under section 3.1.

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 71572, Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

8765

Pollutant:

Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Zero of the 1 samples collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceeded the evaluation guideline for Nitrate-N.

Data Reference:

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

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Nitrate-N levels should not to exceed 100 mg/L (USEPA National Ambient Water Quality Objective)

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at Cross Creek - Rd. 60 and Hwy 99.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected from Jun 24 2003 to Jun 24 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	88923	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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 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 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 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 zero samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 88923, Parathion	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62138

Pollutant:

Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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:

The USEPA national ambient water quality chronic criterion (4-hour maximum) for parathion, is 0.013 µg/L, is for freshwater aquatic life.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-2/22/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	85458	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

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)(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 3 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 3 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 85458, Selenium	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62158

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	89089	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
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 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 the three 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 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 the three samples exceed the 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 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using 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:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 89089, Temperature, water	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62160

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed Ag Waiver data for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature.

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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 (Tulare Lake Basin Plans).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

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 (1976)

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	89001	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Thiobencarb/Bolero
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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the three 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 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 three samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 89001, Thiobencarb/Bolero	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62161

Pollutant:

Thiobencarb/Bolero

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Various Pollutants in Southern San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009.

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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin)

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Second Edition. rev. Jan 2004

Evaluation Guideline:

The Basin Plan states: "Where valid testing has developed 96-hour LC50 values for aquatic organisms..., the Board will consider one tenth of this value for the most sensitive species tested as the upper limit (daily maximum) for the protection of aquatic life... or [O]ther available information on the pesticide..." The evaluation guideline for Thiobencarb, 1.4 ug/L, is a maximum acceptable toxicicant concentration (MATC) calculated for Daphnia magna (Water flea). (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database)

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties) was collected at 1 monitoring site [Cross Creek at Highway 99 (Revised) - 558CCRSP4]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 12/15/2008-6/17/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

Data for this line of evidence was collected as part of the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	89002	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

Pollutant:	Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)
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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the one 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 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 one samples exceed the 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 are 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.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 89002, Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)	Region 5
Cross Creek (Kings and Tulare Counties)

LOE ID:

62036

Pollutant:

Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The sample result did not exceed the evaluation guideline value (572 ug/Kg dry weight).

Data Reference: