Water Body Name: | Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
Water Body ID: | CAR1141201419990614115350 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
17496 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
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 #30145 exceed the water quality objective.The pollutants in LOE #29884 do not have water quality objectives and, therefore, a decision could not be made. The samples were analyzed for 95 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 95 pesticide analytes, 3 to 4 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 370 samples for both LOEs, #29884, without criteria, or LOE #30145 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 30145 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aldrin | Atrazine | Carbofuran | Chlordane | Chlorpyrifos | Dacthal | Dieldrin | Endrin | Glyphosate | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), alpha | Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), beta | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Molinate | Simazine | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toxaphene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 370 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 370 pesticide samples collected in Austin Creek exceed the objective as all of the samples were either measured as non-detect or were measured as detected but not quantified with reporting limits below objectives or evaluation guidelines. The samples were analyzed for 95 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 95 pesticide analytes, 3 to 4 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). | ||||
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: | 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: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 29884 | ||||
Pollutant: | Azinphos, Ethyl (Ethyl Guthion) | Bolstar | Carbofuran | Chlorothalonil | Chlorpyrifos, methyl | Ciodrin | Demeton s | Dichlofenthion | Dichlorvos | Dimethoate | Dioxathion | Dyfonate (Fonofos or Fonophos) | Endrin Ketone | Ethion | Ethoprop | Famphur | Fenchlorphos | Fenitrothion | Fensulfothion | Fenthion | Leptophos | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Merphos | Methidathion | Methyl Parathion | Mevinphos | Naled | Oxadiazon | Oxychlordane | Phorate | Phosmet | Phosphamidon | Prometon (Prometone) | Prometryn | Propazine | Secbumeton | Simetryn | Sulfotep | Tedion | Terbufos | Terbuthylazine | Terbutryn | Tetrachlorvinphos | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Thionazin | Tokuthion | 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 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 370 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 370 pesticide samples collected in Austin Creek exceed the objective as all of the samples were either measured as non-detect or were measured as detected but not quantified with reporting limits below objectives or evaluation guidelines. The samples were analyzed for 95 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 95 pesticide analytes, 3 to 4 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). | ||||
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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
12345 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Aluminum |
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 4 aluminum 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 4 samples exceeded the aluminum 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25391 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 aluminum samples collected from Austin Creek 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 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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
15762 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
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 40 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 40 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 26339 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 ammonia as nitrogen samples collected from Austin Creek 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: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
10677 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Copper | Lead | Mercury | Nickel | Selenium | Silver | 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: | 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 40 metals 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 40 samples exceeded the metal objectives, 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 21550 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Copper | Lead | Mercury | Nickel | Selenium | Silver | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 40 metal samples collected in the Laguna de Santa Rosa exceed the objectives. There were 4 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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
12476 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
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 4 chloride samples exceed the evaluation guideline. The weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. Per Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy, a minimum of 5 samples are needed, and only 4 samples are available. This conclusion is also based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25454 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 chloride samples collected in Austin Creek 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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
13346 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
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 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.3 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. The weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. None of the 3 E. Coli and none of the 4 total coliform samples exceed the evaluation guidelines used to interpret the water quality objective, and these sample sizes are insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 5 samples are needed for application of Table 3.2, and only 3 and 4 samples are available. This conclusion is also based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7074 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 3 E. coli samples from Kidd Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. Concentrations range from 14 to 30 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by the Community Clean Water Institute (CCWI 2006). | ||||
Data Reference: | Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2005. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | ||||
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. | ||||
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 E. coli levels exceed 235 MPN / 100 ml. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units. | ||||
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 from Kidd Creek, just downstream of the Bed and Breakfast in Cazadero. Kidd Creek is a tributary to Austin Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected monthly in June, July, and August 2005. | ||||
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: | The samples were collected in accordance the "Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods" (CCWI 2007). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods. Updated April 12, 2007 | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7071 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 total coliform samples collected from Kidd Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 187 to 416 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by the Community Clean Water Institute (CCWI 2006). | ||||
Data Reference: | Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2005. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | ||||
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. | ||||
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. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units. | ||||
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 from Kidd Creek, just downstream of the Bed and Breakfast in Cazadero. Kidd Creek is a tributary to Austin Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a month in April, June, July, and August of 2005. | ||||
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 in accordance with the "Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods" (CCWI 2007). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods. Updated April 12, 2007 | ||||
DECISION ID |
13347 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrate |
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 81 nitrate 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 81 samples exceed the pesticides 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8902 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 81 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 81 nitrate as nitrogen samples collected in Austin Creek exceeded the objective. The sample concentrations range from non-detect (detection limits of 0.02 mg/L - 0.04 mg/L) to 0.07 mg/L. These samples were collected by the Community Clean Water Institutes Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program (CCWI 2005, CCWI 2006, CCWI 2007). | ||||
Data Reference: | Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2005. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | ||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2006. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | |||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2004. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on October 1, 2008 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The water quality objective for nitrate as nitrogen is 45 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The water samples were collected at 3 locations in Austin Creek. The sites are in the lower section of the mainstem from below Cazadero to the confluence with the Russian River. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from February 2004 to October 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 in accordance with the "Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods" (CCWI 2007). At each site a grab sample was collected using a container on a pole or by a bucket attached to a rope. The samples were then put into sterilized Whirl Pak bags, put into coolers on ice, and brought to the lab for analysis. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
13345 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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. Fourteen out of 85 dissolved oxygen 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) Fourteen of the 85 samples exceed 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 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8901 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 85 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 14 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Fourteen of the 85 samples collected in Austin Creek exceeded the minimum DO water quality objective. Data were divided into two categories, 1) no spawning, incubation, and emergence occurring and 2) spawning, incubation, and emergence occurring. Presence and absence of salmonid species was determined by utilizing CDFG map (Brooks 2002). Timing of spawning, incubation, and emergence was determined utilizing Steiner Environmental Consulting (1996).
The DO values when no spawning, incubation, and emergence were occurring ranged from 2.8 mg/L to 11.2 mg/L (6 exceedences of the objective). DO values during times of spawning, incubation, and emergence ranged from 6.4 mg/L to13.9 mg/L (8 exceedences of the objective). These samples were collected by the Community Clean Water Institutes Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program (CCWI 2005, CCWI 2006, and CCWI 2007). |
||||
Data Reference: | Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2005. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | ||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2006. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | |||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2004. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on October 1, 2008 | |||||
Map of Historical Salmonid Streams and Calwater 2.2a Hydrologic Sub-Areas. California Department of Fish and Game, Central Coast Region. IHRMP North Coast GIS Lab. Hopland, CA | |||||
A History of the Salmonid Decline in the Russian River. | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): (1) Dissolved oxygen concentrations for waters not listed in Table 3-1, and where dissolved oxygen objectives are not prescribed, shall not be reduced below 6.0 mg/L for waters designated as COLD.
(2) Dissolved oxygen concentrations for waters not listed in Table 3-1, and where dissolved oxygen objectives are not prescribed, shall not be reduced below 9.0 mg/L for waters designated as SPWN 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 water samples were collected at 3 locations in Austin Creek. The sites are in the lower section of the mainstem from below Cazadero to the confluence with the Russian River. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The DO samples were collected from February 2004 to November 2006. The DO samples were collected as instantaneous values and do not represent diurnal 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: | Samples were collected in accordance with the "Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods" (CCWI 2007). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods. Updated April 12, 2007 | ||||
DECISION ID |
12500 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
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 200 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 200 samples exceeded the PCB evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 18 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 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25479 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 200 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 200 polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) analytes collected in Austin Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. Each of the 4 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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
4421 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
It is unknown if any of the phosphorus samples exceed the water quality objective as there is insufficient information available to determine exceedance. Specifically, the samples cannot be compared to the objective because diel samples for dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and/or chlorophyll-a are not available. Nutrients such as phosphorus do not impair beneficial uses by themselves, or cause non-attainment of the objective. Rather, they cause indirect impacts through algal growth and extreme diel patterns for DO and pH, which then impair uses. Waterbody-specific factors such as riparian cover, flow conditions, and stream channel configuration also affect how nutrients are processed within the stream and play a large role in determining whether or not nuisance algal conditions will prevail. For these reasons, comparing a single nutrient value to the biostimulatory objective is not recommended. Instead, nutrient-related indicator parameters, such as diel measurements of DO, pH, and/or chlorophyll-a, should be evaluated to determine attainment of the objective and protection of beneficial uses. When nutrient-related indicator parameters exceed targets, nutrient concentrations will then be analyzed to determine whether phosphorus should be added to a possible listing under the 303(d) List. Therefore, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is also 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) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Note: Lines of evidence for both orthophosphate and total dissolved phosphorus data support this Decision. Total dissolved phosphorus includes orthophosphate. Phosphorus is used as the pollutant for this Decision because it includes both fractions and is easier to understand its relationship to other nutrients and the water quality objective. |
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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 9023 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | It is unknown whether any of the 80 phosphorus samples collected in Austin Creek exceed the objective as there is insufficient information available to determine exceedance. Specifically, the samples cannot be compared to the objective because diel samples for dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and/or chlorophyll-a are not available. Nutrients, such as phosphorus, alone do not impair beneficial uses or cause non-attainment of the objective. Rather, they cause indirect impacts through algal growth and extreme diel patterns for DO and pH, which then impair uses. Waterbody-specific factors such as riparian cover, flow conditions, and stream channel configuration also affect how nutrients are processed within the stream and play a large role in determining whether or not nuisance algal conditions will prevail. For these reasons, comparing a single nutrient value to the biostimulatory objective is not recommended. Instead, nutrient-related indicator parameters, such as diel measurements of DO, pH, and/or chlorophyll-a, should be evaluated to determine attainment of the objective and protection of beneficial uses. When nutrient-related indicator parameters exceed targets, nutrient concentrations will then be analyzed to determine whether phosphorus should be added to a possible listing under the 303(d) List. The sample concentrations range from non-detect (reporting limits of 0.03 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L) to 0.167 mg/L. These samples were collected by the Community Clean Water Institutes Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program (CCWI 2005, CCWI 2006, and CCWI 2007). | ||||
Data Reference: | Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2005. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | ||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2006. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | |||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2004. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on October 1, 2008 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The water samples were collected at 3 locations in Austin Creek. The sites are in the lower section of the mainstem from below Cazadero to the confluence with the Russian River. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from February 2004 to November 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 in accordance with the "Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods" (CCWI 2007). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods. Updated April 12, 2007 | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 1716 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
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: | Samples were taken at sampling stations AUS010, AUS020 and AUS030. Sample phosphate concentrations ranged from 0.016 to 0.098 mg/L.
(Sandler, 2004) |
||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan does not have a water quality objective for orthophosphate. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | There is no appropriate interpretive evaluation guideline for orthophosphate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | There are three sampling locations. AUS010 is located downstream of Laguna de Santa Rosa, at the first bridge, confluence with Russian River. AUS020 is located at 1180 Austin Creek Road. AUS030 is located near the Cazadero Bakery, just upstream of large culvert | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were taken at AUS010 one time, once a month during May, July and October 2003. Samples were taken at AUS020 one time, once a month during March, May, July and October 2003. Samples were taken at AUS030 one time, once a month during March, May, July and October 2003. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Draft QAPP for Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Project for the Community Clean Water Institute. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
4490 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductance |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
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. Two lines of evidence are 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 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) Three months of 5 months samples exceeded the specific conductance water quality objective. Additionally, none of the 4 grab samples collected under the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program exceed the objective. A total of 3 exceedances out of 9 samples 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 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 1715 | ||||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductance | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | On 3/27/2003 none of the values are in exceedance. On 5/19/2003 none of the values are in exceedance. On 7/8/2003 two of three stations have values in exceedance of the objective. On 9/9/2003 two of the three stations have values in exceedance of the objective. On 10/28/2003 two of the three stations have values in exceedance of the objective. For Austin Creek 3 months out of the 5 months of samples are in exceedance of the objective. (Sandler, 2004) | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Specific conductivity for Russian River (Downstream)- 50% upper and lower limits of 285 micromhos represent the 50 percentile values of the monthly means for a calendar year. 50% or more of the monthly means must be less than or equal to an upper limit and greater than or equal to a lower limit. 90% upper and lower limits of 375 micromhos represent the 90 percentile values for a calendar year. 90% or more of the values must be less than or equal to an upper limit and greater than or equal to a lower limit. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Sampling station AUS010 is located downstream of Laguna de Santa Rosa at the First bridge at the confluence with Russian River.
Sampling station AUS020 is located at 1180 Austin Creek Road. Sampling station AUS030 is located near the Cazadero Bakery, just upstream of large culvert. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | There are 5 months of sampling, with one day of samples for each month at each station. Samples were taken on the same days at each location in March, May, July, September and October 2003. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Draft QAPP for Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Project for the Community Clean Water Institute. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 21331 | ||||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 specific conductivity grab samples collected from Austin Creek 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 22 CCR 64449: The recommended secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) is 900 uS/cm. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
12546 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
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 4 sulfate samples exceed the evaluation guideline. The weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. Per Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy, a minimum of 4 samples are needed, and only 2 samples are available. This conclusion is also based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25563 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 sulfate samples collected in Austin Creek 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 Austin Creek near the confluence with the Russian River (SWAMP Station ID 114AUSCRK). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected over 4 site visits from November 2004 to June 2005. 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 |
13348 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
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: | 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. Four out of 99 pH 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) Four of the 99 samples exceed the pesticides 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 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): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8898 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 99 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Four of the 99 samples for pH collected in Austin Creek exceeded the pH water quality objective. The pH values ranged from 7.5 to 8.9. These samples were collected by the Community Clean Water Institutes Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program to assist the Regional Water Board in determining where TMDL initiation is appropriate within the Russian River Watershed (CCWI 2007). | ||||
Data Reference: | Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2005. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | ||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2006. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on August 25, 2008 | |||||
Community Clean Water Institute Master Data for 2004. Downloaded from http://ccwi.org/issues/data.htm on October 1, 2008 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The maximum pH objective is 8.5. The minimum pH objective is 6.5. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The water samples were collected at 3 locations in Austin Creek. The sites are in the lower section of the mainstem from below Cazadero to the confluence with the Russian River. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The pH samples were collected during 33 site visits from November 2004 to November 2006. The pH samples were collected as instantaneous measurements and do not represent diurnal 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: | Samples were collected in accordance with the "Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods" (CCWI 2007). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Community Clean Water Institute Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program Sampling and Analysis Methods. Updated April 12, 2007 | ||||
DECISION ID |
6509 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Sedimentation/Siltation |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Construction/Land Development | Dam Construction | Disturbed Sites (Land Develop.) | Erosion/Siltation | Flow Alteration/Regulation/Modification | Silviculture |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
USEPA Action (if applicable): | USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 4756 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sedimentation/Siltation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
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: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
6510 |
Region 1 |
Russian River HU, Lower Russian River HA, Austin Creek HSA |
||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Flow Alteration/Regulation/Modification | Habitat Modification | Hydromodification | Nonpoint Source | Removal of Riparian Vegetation |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
USEPA Action (if applicable): | USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 4757 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
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: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||