Final California 2010 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 1 - North Coast Region

Water Body Name:	Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)
Water Body ID:	CAR1111103219980709182643
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	4228	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Nonpoint Source \| Removal of Riparian Vegetation
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for removal from the Section 303(d) List under Section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record. Based on the readily available information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the Section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on staff findings that: (1) The Lower Eel River Total Maximum Daily Loads for Temperature and Sediment were established by the USEPA on December 18, 2007. (2) Temperature data from McNulty Slough (LOE 5590) were not comparable to the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective as none of the samples were collected over 7 consecutive days. (3) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are attained.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4228, Temperature, water	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

3661

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Not Specified

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Unknown

Temporal Representation:

Unknown

Environmental Conditions:

Unknown

QAPP Information:

Unknown

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4228, Temperature, water	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

5590

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The water temperatures of McNulty Slough do not reflect natural conditions as the environmental factors that influence water temperature have been altered by human activities in the Eel River watershed. For instance, the Lower Eel River TMDLs for Temperature and Sediment (USEPA 2007) states that shade and temperature modeling, which compared current conditions to historical vegetation conditions, found that natural temperatures are cooler than estimated current temperatures. The two modeled tributaries are Salt River and Larabee Creek, with the results applied to all other tributaries, including McNulty Slough. In order to determine if temperature adversely affects beneficial uses, staff attempted to compare temperature data to the 24°C lethal temperature evaluation guideline from Carter (2008). The Wiyot Tribe collected 53 surface water temperature samples in McNulty Slough. None of these samples were collected over 7 consecutive days and staff were therefore unable to compare them to the guideline. There was 1 instance where the average water temperature over a 3-minute period on 06/29/2005 exceeded 24°C. Data are summarized by the Wiyot Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

Wiyot Tribe Water Quality Monitoring Program. Data for multiple parameters in McNultly Slough, Humboldt Bay Entrance, Indian Island, Mad River Slough, and Reservation Wetland, December 2004 to December 2006

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Thermal Plan (SWRCB 1972) for estuaries: (A) For existing discharges: (1) Elevated temperature waste discharges shall comply with the following: (a) The maximum temperature shall not exceed the natural receiving water temperature by more than 20°F. (b) Elevated temperature waste discharges either individually or combined with other discharges shall not create a zone, defined by water temperatures of more than 1°F above natural receiving water temperature, which exceeds 25 percent of the cross-sectional area of a main river channel at any point. (c) No discharge shall cause a surface water temperature rise greater than 4°F above the natural temperature of the receiving waters at any time or place. (d) Additional limitations shall be imposed when necessary to
assure protection of beneficial uses. (2) Thermal waste discharges shall comply with the provisions of (A)(1) above and, in addition, the maximum temperature of thermal waste discharges shall not exceed 86°F. (B) For new discharges: (1) Elevated temperature waste discharges shall comply with item (A)(1) above. (2) Thermal waste discharges having a maximum temperature greater than 4°F above the natural temperature of the receiving water are prohibited.
(3) Additional limitations shall be imposed when necessary to assure protection of beneficial uses. Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): 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. At no time or place shall the temperature of any COLD water be increased by more than 5°F above natural receiving water temperature.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California (Thermal Plan). State Water Resources Control Board

Evaluation Guideline:

Per "Effects of Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen/Total Dissolved Gas, Ammonia, and pH on Salmonids" (Carter 2008), the lethal temperature evaluation guideline for both the steelhead adult migration and holding and the steelhead juvenile growth and rearing life stages is 24°C. This guideline is for chronic exposure and requires data that is measured for at least 7 consecutive days as salmonids may survive brief periods at these levels.

Guideline Reference:

Effects of Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen/Total Dissolved Gas, Ammonia, and pH on Salmonids. Implications for California's North Coast TMDLs. California Regional Water Quality Control Board, North Coast Region

Spatial Representation:

The temperatures samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

The temperature samples were collected every two weeks from December 2004 to December 2006. Samples were collected during mid and high tides. The sonde was deployed for approximately 15 minutes, with a 3-5 minute equilibration period and an 8-10 minute sample period with 4 second intervals.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring. Table Bluff Reservation - Wiyot Tribe. Tribal Environmental Department. Prepared by Yurok Tribe Environmental Program. September 2004


DECISION ID	17151	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Aldrin \| Atrazine \| Azinphos, Ethyl (Ethyl Guthion) \| Bolstar \| Carbofuran \| Chlordane \| Chlorothalonil \| Chlorpyrifos \| Chlorpyrifos, methyl \| Ciodrin \| Dacthal \| Demeton s \| Dichlofenthion \| Dichlorvos \| Dieldrin \| Dimethoate \| Dioxathion \| Dyfonate (Fonofos or Fonophos) \| Endrin \| Endrin Ketone \| Ethion \| Ethoprop \| Famphur \| Fenchlorphos \| Fenitrothion \| Fensulfothion \| Fenthion \| Glyphosate \| Heptachlor \| Heptachlor epoxide \| Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB \| Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), alpha \| Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), beta \| Leptophos \| Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) \| Merphos \| Methidathion \| Methoxychlor \| Methyl Parathion \| Mevinphos \| Molinate \| Naled \| Oxadiazon \| Oxychlordane \| Phorate \| Phosmet \| Phosphamidon \| Prometon (Prometone) \| Prometryn \| Propazine \| Secbumeton \| Simazine \| Simetryn \| Sulfotep \| Tedion \| Terbufos \| Terbuthylazine \| Terbutryn \| Tetrachlorvinphos \| Thiobencarb/Bolero \| Thionazin \| Tokuthion \| Toxaphene \| Trichlorfon \| Trichloronate \| beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH) \| cis-Nonachlor \| delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH) \| o,p'-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)) \| o,p'-DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) \| p,p'-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) \| p,p'-DDE \| p,p'-DDMU \| trans-Nonachlor
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:	These pollutants are 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples in LOE 30100 exceed the water quality objective.The pollutants in LOE 29782 do not have water quality objectives and, therefore, a decision could not be made. The samples were analyzed for 93 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 93 pesticide analytes, 7 to 10 samples were collected. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008). Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 825 samples for both LOEs, #29872, without criteria, or LOE #30100 with criteria, exceeded the water quality guidelines and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

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

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17151, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

29782

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

825

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 825 pesticide samples collected in the lower mainstem Eel River exceed water quality objectives.The samples were analyzed for 93 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 93 pesticide analytes, 7 to 10 samples were collected. Pollutants in this data set with applicable water quality guidelines are assessed in LOE 30100. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no bioaccumulation of pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the limiting concentrations set forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Article 4, Section 64444, and listed in Table 3.2 of the Basin Plan.
No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of the pesticides assessed for this waterbody for the Municipal & Domestic Supply beneficial use could be found that meet the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17151, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

30100

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

825

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 825 pesticide samples collected in the lower mainstem Eel River exceed water quality objectives.The samples were analyzed for 93 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 93 pesticide analytes, 7 to 10 samples were collected. Pollutants in this data set with no applicable water quality guidelines are assessed in LOE 29782. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Hexachlorocyclohexane, alpha (0.0026 ug/l)
Hexachlorocyclohexane, beta (0.0091ug/l)
Aldrin (0.000049 ug/l)
Atrazine (0.001 ug/l)
Carbofuran (0.04 mg/l)
Chlordane (0.0001 ug/l)
Chlorpyrifos (0.083 ug/l)
Dacthal (70 ug/l)
Dieldrin (0.00014 ug/l)
Endrin (0.002 ug/l)
Glyphosate (700 ug/l)
Heptachlor (0.01 ug/l)
Heptachlor epoxide (0.01 ug/l)
Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB (0.001 ug/l)
Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) (.98 ug/l)
Methoxychlor (0.03 mg/l)
Molinate (0.02 mg/l)
Simazine (0.04 mg/l)
Thiobencarb/Bolero (0.07 mg/l)
Toxaphene (0.003 mg/l)

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency

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

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	15745	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Ammonia as Nitrogen
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 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. None of the 15 ammonia as nitrogen 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 Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 15 samples exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 15745, Ammonia as Nitrogen	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

26316

Pollutant:

Ammonia as Nitrogen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 15 ammonia as nitrogen samples collected from Lower Mainstem Eel River exceed the objective. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): 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 (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The 1-hour average concentration (acute criterion or CMC) of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg N/L) for freshwater where salmonid fish are present, which is not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average, is calculated using the following equation: CMC=0.275/(1+10^(7.204 - pH)) + 39.0/(1+10^(pH - 7.204)).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (Puckett 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	10655	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Antimony \| Arsenic \| Beryllium \| Cadmium \| Chromium (total) \| Copper \| Lead \| Mercury \| Nickel \| Selenium \| Silver \| Thallium \| Zinc
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:	Multiple metal pollutants are 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess these pollutants. None of the 227 metal samples exceed water quality objectives. 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 227 samples exceed the metal objectives, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 20 per the binomial distribution described in Section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 10655, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25250

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 78 metal samples collected from the Eel River Delta exceed the evaluation guideline. All 13 of the metal parameters were collected at each of the 6 sampling events. All sample analyzes reported that metals were not detected (ND). Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

Staff Report Regarding Russian River Bacterial Water Quality Monitoring in the Vicinity of Fitch Mountain Sonoma County, California. April through September, 1995. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Arsenic objective is 0.05 mg/L. Cadmium objective is 0.01 mg/L. Chromium objective is 0.05 mg/L. Lead objective is 0.05 mg/L. Mercury objective is 0.002 mg/L. Selenium objective is 0.01 mg/L. Silver objective is 0.05 mg/L. Per 22 CCR 64431: Antimony maximum contaminant level is 0.006 mg/l. Beryllium maximum contaminant level is 0.004 mg/l. Nickel maximum contaminant level is 0.1 mg/L. Thallium maximum contaminant level is 0.002 mg/l. Per 22 CCR 64449: Copper secondary maximum contaminant level is 1.0 mg/L. Zinc secondary maximum contaminant level is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as grab samples on May 4, August 19, and December 2, 2005, and on March 17, July 20, and November 3, 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 10655, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

21528

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

149

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 149 metal samples collected in the Lower Mainstem Eel River Watershed exceed the objectives. There were 14 to 15 samples collected for each of the 10 metal parameters. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Arsenic objective is 0.05 mg/L. Cadmium objective is 0.01 mg/L. Chromium objective is 0.05 mg/L. Lead objective is 0.05 mg/L. Mercury objective is 0.002 mg/L. Selenium objective is 0.01 mg/L. Silver objective is 0.05 mg/L. Per 22 CCR 64431: Nickel maximum contaminant level is 0.1 mg/L. Per 22 CCR 64449: Copper secondary maximum contaminant level is 1.0 mg/L. Zinc secondary maximum contaminant level is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	12454	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	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. None of the 14 chloride 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 14 samples exceeded the chloride evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12454, Chloride	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25432

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 14 chloride samples collected in the Lower Mainstem Eel River exceed the evaluation guideline. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Waters shall not contain taste- or odor-producing substances in concentrations that impart undesirable tastes or odors to fish flesh or other edible products of aquatic origin, or that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per 22 CCR 64449: The recommended Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for chloride is 250 mg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	11793	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Fecal Coliform
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:	Fecal coliform 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. Two of the 6 fecal coliform samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the narrative water quality objective. The evaluation guideline is the recommended concentration for beach posting when single sample fecal coliform levels exceed 400 MPN / 100 ml per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006). 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) Two of the 6 samples exceed the evaluation guideline, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 5 per the Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11793, Fecal Coliform	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

23465

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Two of the 6 single fecal coliform samples collected from the Eel River Delta exceed the evaluation guideline. Values range from 17 to 1,600 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels. In no case shall coliform concentrations in waters of the North Coast Region exceed the following: In waters designated for contact recreation (REC-1), the median fecal coliform concentration based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period shall not exceed 50 MPN* / 100 ml, nor shall more than 10% of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN / 100 ml. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample fecal coliform levels exceed 400 MPN / 100 ml.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as grab samples on May 4, August 19, and December 2, 2005, and on March 17, July 20, and November 3, 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	11848	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Oil
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:	Total petroleum hydrocarbons as oil in Humboldt Bay 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. None of the 6 samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 6 samples exceed the objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 5 listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11848, Oil	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25248

Pollutant:

Oil

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Estuarine Habitat | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 6 total petroleum hydrocarbon as oil samples collected from the Eel River Delta exceed the evaluation guideline. All sample analyzes reported that oil was not detected (ND). Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 1986) also known as the Gold Book: concentrations of oil at 0.001 mg/l can harm aquatic life.

Guideline Reference:

Quality Criteria for Water 1986. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Regulations and Standards. Washington D.C. EPA 440/5-86-001.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as grab samples on May 4, August 19, and December 2, 2005, and on March 17, July 20, and November 3, 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	12489	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
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 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. None of the 500 polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 500 samples exceeded the PCB evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 43 per the binomial distribution described in Section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12489, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25468

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

500

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 500 polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) analytes collected in the lower mainstem Eel River watershed exceed the evaluation guideline. Each of the 10 samples were analyzed for 50 PCB cogeners. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007, p. 3-4.00): 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 (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Public Health Goal for Water Soluble Polychlorinated Biphenyls Expected to Found in Drinking Water" (OEHHA 2007): The health-protective concentration of water-soluble PCBs in
drinking water associated with a one in one million extra lifetime cancer risk is 0.09 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Public Health Goal for Water Soluble Polychlorinated Biphenyls Expected to Be Found in Drinking Water. Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Branch, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	12669	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Pentachlorophenol (PCP)
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 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. None of the 3 samples analyzed for pentachlorophenol 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 3 samples exceed the pentachlorophenol evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12669, Pentachlorophenol (PCP)	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25585

Pollutant:

Pentachlorophenol (PCP)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 3 pentachlorophenol samples collected in the Lower Mainstem Eel River watershed exceed the evaluation guideline. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The recommended criterion for pentachlorophenol for the protection of source waters for human health consumption of water and organisms is 0.27 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 15 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	12857	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Pesticides
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 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. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 834 pesticide samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) Two of the 834 samples exceed the pesticide water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 73 per the binomial distribution described in Section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12857, Pesticides	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25626

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One DDT sample collected in the Lower Eel River HA had a detectable level of DDT and the sample exceeds the evaluation guideline. The sample concentration was reported as detected not quantifiable (DNQ), with estimated value of .003 ug/l (method detection limit of 0.002 ug/l, reporting limit of .005 ug/l). There were also an additional 9 samples from the Lower Eel River HA, which were non-detect. However, these non-detect data could not be utilized in this assessment because the detection limit for DDT is above the evaluation guideline. Per the listing policy, when a sample value is less than the quantitation limit, and the quantitation limit is greater than the evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP) (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). DDT, DDE, and DDD data from SWAMP Sampling for Years 2001-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The recommended criterion for DDT for the protection of source waters for human health consumption of water and organisms is 0.00022 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or runs.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 10 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12857, Pesticides	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25627

Pollutant:

Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 8 hexachlorobenzene samples collected in the lower mainstem Eel River exceeds the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from non-detect (with a reporting limit of 0.001 ug/l) to detected but not quantified with a concentration of at least 0.001 ug/l. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The recommended criterion for hexachlorobenzene for the protection of source waters for human health consumption of water and organisms is 0.00028 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	10554	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	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. None of the 14 specific conductivity samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 14 samples exceed the specific conductivity objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 10554, Specific Conductivity	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

21301

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 14 specific conductivity grab samples collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River exceed the objective. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The 90% upper limit specific conductance objective at 77 F is 375 micromhos (or mS/cm2). The 50% upper limit specific conductance objective at 77 F is 225 micromhos (or mS/cm2). The 90% and 50% upper limits represent the 90/50 percentile values for a calendar year. 90% or 50% or more of the values must be less than or equal to the upper limit.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (Puckett 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	12524	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	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. None of the 15 sulfate 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 15 samples exceed the sulfate evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12524, Sulfates	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25541

Pollutant:

Sulfates

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 15 sulfate samples collected in the Lower Mainstem Eel River watershed exceed the evaluation guideline. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007, p. 3-3.00): Waters shall not contain taste- or odor-producing substances in concentrations that impart undesirable tastes or odors to fish flesh or other edible products of aquatic origin, or that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per 22 CCR 64449 (Table 64449-B): The recommended secondary maximum contaminant level for sulfate is 250 mg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 15 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	11794	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Total Coliform
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:	Total coliform 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. None of the 6 total coliform samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the narrative water quality objective. The evaluation guideline is the recommended concentration for beach posting when single sample total coliform levels exceed 10,000 MPN / 100 ml per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006). 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 6 samples exceed the evaluation guideline, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 5 per the Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11794, Total Coliform	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

24854

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 6 single fecal coliform samples collected from the Eel River Delta exceed the evaluation guideline. Values range from 50 to less than 1,600 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample total coliform levels exceed 10,000 MPN / 100 ml.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as grab samples on May 4, August 19, and December 2, 2005, and on March 17, July 20, and November 3, 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	11846	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel
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:	Total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel in Humboldt Bay 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. None of the 6 samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 6 samples exceed the objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 5 listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11846, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

24856

Pollutant:

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Diesel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 6 total petroleum hydrocarbon as diesel samples collected from the Eel River Delta exceed the evaluation guideline. All sample analyzes reported that diesel was not detected (ND). Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the U.S. EPA's "Oral Reference Doses and Oral Slope Factors for JP-4, JP-5, Diesel fuel, and Gasoline" (Dollarhide 1992): The Suggested No Adverse Response Level for total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel is 56.0 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Memorandum from Joan S. Dollarhide, U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, to Gerald Hiatt, U.S. EPA Region IX, regarding 3QTR FY92 Master List Response Table Request

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as grab samples on May 4, August 19, and December 2, 2005, and on March 17, July 20, and November 3, 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	11847	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline
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:	Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline in Humboldt Bay 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. None of the 6 samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 6 samples exceed the objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 5 listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11847, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25247

Pollutant:

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as Gasoline

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 6 total petroleum hydrocarbon as gasoline samples collected from the Eel River Delta exceed the evaluation guideline. All sample analyzes reported that gasoline was not detected (ND). Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per Per Water Quality Criteria, Second Edition (McKee & Wolf 1963): The taste and odor threshold for gasoline is 0.005 mg/l.

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Criteria. Second Edition. California State Water Resources Control Board. Publication 3-A

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected as grab samples on May 4, August 19, and December 2, 2005, and on March 17, July 20, and November 3, 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	11849	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	The parameter pH in Humboldt Bay 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 53 pH samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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 the 53 samples exceed the objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 9 as listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11849, pH	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25251

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Estuarine Habitat | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 53 mean pH values calculated from samples collected in the Eel River Delta exceed the objective. Mean pH concentrations range from 7.11 to 8.54. Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): For waters not listed in Table 3-1 and where pH are not prescribed, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The temperatures samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	12333	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Aluminum
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Natural Sources
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This listing applies to the mainstem Eel River in the Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta). 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. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of 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) Four of the 15 Aluminum samples exceed the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast RWQCB staff conclude that the water segment-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12333, Aluminum	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

25379

Pollutant:

Aluminum

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four of the 15 aluminum samples collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River exceed the objective. Sample concentrations range from 6.26 to 3,618 ug/L. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The Maximum Contaminant Level for aluminum is 1.0 mg/l (1,000 ug/L).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the Lower Mainstem Eel River at Holmes (SWAMP Station ID 111EELHOL). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected from 14 site visits from February 2002 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (Puckett 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)


DECISION ID	11850	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

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

Regional Board Conclusion:	Dissolved oxygen in the lower mainstem Eel River 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. Thirty-seven out of 51 samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to 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) Thirty-seven of the 51 samples do not attain the dissolved oxygen objective, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are not attained and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 11850, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

23454

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Estuarine Habitat | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Thirty-seven of the 52 minimum dissolved oxygen (DO) values calculated from samples collected in the Eel River Delta exceed the objectives. Data were divided into two categories, 1) no spawning and incubation occurring and 2) spawning and incubation occurring. Information on the timing of spawning and incubation for the Eel River was not readily available and thus information from the neighboring Russian River Watershed was used to determine periodicity (Steiner 1996). The minimum DO values when no spawning and incubation were occurring range from 2.71 mg/L to 11.85 mg/L (16 exceedences of the objective). Minimum DO values during times of spawning and incubation range from 4.77 mg/L to 10.39 mg/L (21 exceedences of the objective). Samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe and data are summarized by the Tribe (Wiyot 2007).

Data Reference:

A History of the Salmonid Decline in the Russian River.

Data for Dissolved Oxygen in McNulty Slough, December 2004 to December 2006. Table Bluff Reservation - Wiyot Tribe

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): For waters not listed in Table 3-1 and where dissolved oxygen objectives are not prescribed the dissolved oxygen concentrations shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l for waters designated with the SPWN beneficial use, and shall not be reduced below 9.0 mg/l for waters designated with the SPWN beneficial use during critical spawning and egg incubation periods.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected by the Wiyot Tribe at McNulty Slough. The site is on the seaward side of the tide gate located just south of McNulty Lane, adjacent to the old Wiyot Rancheria.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected every two weeks from December 2004 to December 2006. Samples were collected during mid and high tides. The sonde was deployed for approximately 15 minutes, with a 3-5 minute equilibration period and an 8-10 minute sample period with 4 second intervals. The minimum dissolved oxygen sample collected during the 8-10 minute sample period was used to determine exceedance of the objective.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected according to Wiyot Tribes Draft Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) for Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring (McKernan et al. 2004).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	4143	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

Pollutant:	Sedimentation/Siltation
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Erosion/Siltation \| Nonpoint Source \| Range Grazing-Riparian and/or Upland \| Silviculture
TMDL Name:	Eel River, Lower Mainstem Sediment & Temperature TMDLs
TMDL Project Code:	1206
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA:	12/18/2007
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for listing under Section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. The Lower Eel River Total Maximum Daily Loads for Temperature and Sediment were established by US EPA in December 18, 2007. Based on the readily available information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the Section 303(d) List.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed, except to include the completion date of the Lower Eel River TMDLs.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4143, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eel River HU, Lower Eel River HA (includes the Eel River Delta)

LOE ID:

3660

Pollutant:

Sedimentation/Siltation

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Not Specified

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Unknown

Temporal Representation:

Unknown

Environmental Conditions:

Unknown

QAPP Information:

Unknown

QAPP Information Reference(s):