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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 2 - San Francisco Bay Region

Water Body Name:	Easkoot Creek
Water Body ID:	CAR2013001220080626140517
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	17810	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Arsenic
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 this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sample exceeds the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One out of four samples exceeded 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, 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 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 17810, Arsenic	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28284

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One samples was collected by SWAMP in April 11, 2005 to determine the concentrations of arsenic in sediment. The concentration of arsenic in the sample was 42.8 mg/kg and exceeded the PEC threshold.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) arsenic - 33 mg/kg dw.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The sample was taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected in spring (4/11/2005) of 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The QA/QC procedure was in compliant with SWAMP's Quality Assurance Management Plan of 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 17810, Arsenic	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

31413

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations of arsenic did not exceed the water quality objectives.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.
Table 3-4 in the Basin Plan (2007) lists freshwater water quality objectives for toxic pollutants: arsenic- 150 ug/L,

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	7744	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments \| Oxygen, Dissolved \| Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This water body is being considered for listing under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this water body. Based on the readily available data for this water body, 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. Dissolved oxygen and temperature measurements exceeded the Basin Plan objectives for waters designated as cold water habitat at 1 of 6 continuous deployments and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. In addition, the macroinvertebrate data indicated good water quality conditions. 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, Water Board staff concludes that this water body supports the beneficial use of aquatic life and meets applicable water quality standards for dissolved oxygen and temperature. Therefore, the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list.

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 7744, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

5723

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Comprehensive water quality assessment was conducted at the Easkoot Creek watershed as part of SWAMP assessment in 2005. Continuous field monitoring of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at two locations. The 7 day average minimum concentrations of dissolved oxygen ranged from 6.33 to 11.15 mg/L and varied with season.

Minimum dissolved oxygen levels fell below the objective of 7 mg/L only once during the dry season in August 2005. During that period minimum values of DO ranged from 5.1 to 6.94 mg/L.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The numeric water quality objective for dissolved oxygen is 7.0 mg/L minimum for waters designated as cold water habitat. The median dissolved oxygen concentration for any three consecutive months shall not be less than 80 percent of the dissolved oxygen content at saturation.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Dissolved oxygen was measured at two sites. One site was located on the mainstem of Easkoot Creek just above the tidal influence and one on Fitzhenry Creek a small tributary. The lowest dissolved oxygen levels were measured at the downstream location in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

At both locations the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of dissolved oxygen at 15 minute intervals lasting 6 to 7 days during spring (April 2005), summer dry season (August 2005), and winter wet season (January 2006).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7744, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

5722

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water quality assessment was conducted at the Easkoot Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2005. Continuous field monitoring at 15 minute increments of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at two locations.

The estimated 7-day mean temperatures ranged from 10.64°C to 15.81 °C and varied with season and location. The 14.8 °C criterion for coho salmon was exceeded in 1 out of 6 continuous temperature deployments during the dry summer season at the downstream reach of the creek. The 17 °C criterion for steelhead was never exceeded.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Temperature objectives for enclosed bays and estuaries are specified in the "Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays of California" including any revisions to the plan. In addition, the following temperature objectives apply to surface waters: 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.
The temperature of any cold or warm freshwater habitat shall not be increased by more than 5°F (2.8°C) above natural receiving water temperature.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sullivan et al. (2000) reviewed a wide range of studies incorporating information from laboratory-based research, field observations, and risk assessment approaches and developed criteria for assessing temperature risk to aquatic life. The 7-day mean temperature (maximum value of the 7-day moving average of the daily mean temperature) of 14.8°C was established as the upper threshold criterion for coho salmon and 17.0°C for steelhead trout. The risk assessment approach used by Sullivan et al. (2000) suggests that temperatures exceeding the above thresholds will cause 10% reduction in average growth compared to optimal conditions.

Guideline Reference:

An Analysis of the Effects of Temperature on Salmonids of the Pacific Northwest with Implications for Selecting Temperature Criteria

Spatial Representation:

Temperature was measured at two sites. One site was located on the mainstem of Easkoot Creek just above the tidal influence and one on Fitzhenry Creek a small tributary. The high temperatures were detected at the downstream location in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Concurrent continuous measurements were conducted at both monitoring locations. Temperature was recorded at 15 minute intervals over 6 to 7 days during spring (April 2005), summer dry season (August 2005), and winter wet season (January 2006).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7744, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

5852

Pollutant:

Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments

LOE Subgroup:

Population/Community Degradation

Matrix:

Not Specified

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled from two sites in the Easkoot Creek watershed in April 2005 by the SWAMP program. Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblage metrics were similar to values observed at reference sites in perennial creeks and indicated good conditions. Taxa richness score was 26 and % sensitive EPT was 14.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are lethal to or that produce significant alterations in population or community ecology or receiving water biota. In addition, the health and life history characteristics of aquatic organisms in waters affected by controllable water quality factors shall not differ significantly from those for the same waters in areas unaffected by controllable water quality factors.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Benthic macroinvertebrate assemblage metric scores that are within the range of scores for minimally disturbed reference sites indicate no substantial alterations in community ecology. Taxa richness values at reference sites sampled by the SWAMP program between 2001 and 2003 ranged from 28 to 59. Reference conditions determined for perennial streams such as Easkoot Creek, usually exhibit taxa richness > 38 and % sensitive EPT > 44. A perennial stream could be described as in - excellent condition - if there is no difference between the metrics measured at the site and those established for reference sites. A perennial stream will be described as in - good condition - if the site metrics indicate minor loss of bio-integrity but still a good structure and function, and sensitive species are present in abundance.

Guideline Reference:

Water Quality Monitoring and Bioassessment in Nine San Francisco Bay Region Watersheds: Walker Creek, Lagunitas Creek, San Leandro Creek, Wildcat Creek/San Pablo Creek, Suisun Creek, Arroyo Las Positas, Pescadero Creek/Butano Creek, San Gregorio Creek, and Stevens Creek/Permanente Creek. Oakland, CA: Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board

Spatial Representation:

Benthic macroinvertebrates were measured at two sites. One site was located on the mainstem of Easkoot Creek just above the tidal influence and one on Fitzhenry Creek - a small tributary.

Temporal Representation:

Benthic macroinvertebrates were sampled in April, 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17812	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Cadmium \| Copper \| Lead \| 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:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess these pollutants. Zero samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of one sample exceed the water quality objective, but this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples are needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, 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 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 17812, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28270

Pollutant:

Cadmium | Copper | Lead | Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sample was collected by SWAMP in April 11, 2005 to determine the concentrations of these metals in sediment. The sample did not exceed the PEC for any of these metals.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) cadmium - 4.98 mg/kg; copper - 149 mg/kg; lead - 128 mg/kg; zinc - 459 mg/kg.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The sample was taken from one monitoring location EAS020 of Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was taken in spring (4/11/2005) of 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 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	17813	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Chromium (total)
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 this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One out of one sample exceeded the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One out of four samples exceeded 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, 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 17813, Chromium (total)	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

31414

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations of total dissolved chromium were well below the objective for chromium VI.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17813, Chromium (total)	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28281

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One samples was collected by SWAMP in April 11, 2005 to determine the concentrations of chromium in sediment. The concentration of chromium in the sample was 125 mg/kg and exceeded the PEC threshold.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) chromium - 111 mg/kg dw.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The sample was taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was taken in spring (4/11/2005) of 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The QA/QC procedure was in compliant with SWAMP's Quality Assurance Management Plan of 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	17988	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Copper
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 three samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. [NUMBER] of [NUMBER] samples exceeded the _____ 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 though this water body is impaired for sediment toxicity, these water body-pollutant combinations should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for these pollutants 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 17988, Copper	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

31415

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations of copper did not exceed the water quality objectives.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17989	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Lead
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:	(DO NOT LIST - TOXICANT POLLUTANT) 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 samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 3 samples exceeded 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, RWQCB staff concludes that though this water body is impaired for sediment toxicity, these water body-pollutant combinations should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for these pollutants 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 17989, Lead	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

31416

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations of lead did not exceed the water quality objectives.
Concentrations of total dissolved chromium were well below the objective for chromium VI.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17811	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Mercury \| Selenium \| Silver
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 samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3.Zero of three samples exceeded 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, 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 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 17811, Multiple Pollutants	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

30324

Pollutant:

Mercury | Selenium | Silver

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations of mercury, selenium, and silver did not exceed the water quality objectives.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17814	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Nickel
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 this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One out of one sample exceeded the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One out of four samples exceeded 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, 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 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 17814, Nickel	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28283

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sample was collected by SWAMP in April 11, 2005 to determine the concentration of Nickel in sediment. The concentration of nickel in the sample was 106 mg/kg and exceeded the PEC threshold.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment Quality Guidelines (MacDonald et al., 2000): PEC (probable effect concentration) nickel - 48.6 mg/kg dw.

Guideline Reference:

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

Spatial Representation:

The sample was taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was collected in spring (4/11/2005) of 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 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 17814, Nickel	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

31417

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations nickel did not exceed the water quality objectives.
Concentrations of total dissolved chromium were well below the objective for chromium VI.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17523	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	Toxicity
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the three samples exceeded the water quality objective (Basin Plan) 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, 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 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 17523, Toxicity	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28267

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Sediment

Matrix:

Sediment

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Toxicity testing of sediments

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One sample was collected by SWAMP in April 11, 2005 to evaluate sediment toxicity. Toxicity was not detected. The sample has not displayed statistically significant difference from the control.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances that are lethal to or that produce other detrimental responses in aquatic organisms. There shall be no chronic toxicity in ambient waters. Chronic toxicity is a detrimental biological effect on growth rate, reproduction, fertilization success, larval development, population abundance, community composition, or any other relevant measure of the health of an organism, population, or community.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Sediment toxicity was evaluated according to the SWAMP methodology. Toxicity was determined by comparing mean organism response in samples and negative controls. Statistical evaluation (alpha = 0.05) and a default threshold of 80% of the control value were used to establish whether water exhibited significant toxicity adversely impacting aquatic organisms.

Guideline Reference:

Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, vol. 16, No. 6, pp 13221329

Spatial Representation:

The sample taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The sample was taken in spring (4/11/2005) of 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17523, Toxicity	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28264

Pollutant:

Toxicity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

TOXICITY TESTING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP in 2005-2006 to evaluate water toxicity. No samples were toxic. No samples displayed statistically significant difference from the control.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Water toxicity was evaluated according to the SWAMP methodology. The U.S.EPA whole effluent toxicity protocol (U.S.EPA 1994) was used to test the effect of water samples on three freshwater test organisms. Statistical evaluation (alpha = 0.05) and a default threshold of 80% of the control value were used to establish whether water exhibited significant toxicity adversely impacting aquatic organisms.

Guideline Reference:

Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, vol. 16, No. 6, pp 13221329

Rates, Constant, and Kinetics Formulations in Surface Water Quality Modeling, 2nd Edition. EPA/600/3-85/040. USEPA Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, GA

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were taken from water Year 2005-2006 in spring, dry and wet seasons.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17990	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

Pollutant:	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 samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3.None of 3 samples exceeded 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, RWQCB staff concludes that though this water body is impaired for sediment toxicity, these water body-pollutant combinations should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for these pollutants 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 17990, Zinc	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

31418

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three samples were collected by SWAMP from a monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek. Concentrations zinc did not exceed the water quality objectives.
Concentrations of total dissolved chromium were well below the objective for chromium VI.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were taken from one monitoring location EAS020 in Easkoot Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected on: 4/11/2005, 6/13/2005, and 2/16/2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17417	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

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. One of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the six samples exceeded the water quality objectives (Basin Plan) 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, 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 17417, pH	Region 2
Easkoot Creek

LOE ID:

28234

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six water samples from two monitoring locations (EAS020 & EAS050) were used to assess the data. One exceedance was detected in the wet season.

Data Reference:

Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5. This encompasses the pH range usually found in waters within the basin. Controllable water quality factors shall not cause changes greater than 0.5 units in normal ambient pH levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at two monitoring locations (EAS020 and EAS050).

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during spring, dry, and wet seasons in 2004-2005. Continuous monitoring was conducted between 4/22/05 and 4/29/05.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The QA/QC procedure was comparable with SWAMP'S Quality Assurance Management Plan of 2002.

QAPP Information Reference(s):