| Water Body Name: | Wages Creek HSA, Dehaven Creek |
| Water Body ID: | CAR1131202120020603185605 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
68535 |
Region 1 |
Wages Creek HSA, Dehaven Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Regional Board Conclusion:
The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: Regional Water Board Conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 temperature consistent with Listing Policy section 6.1.5.9. When compared to the 14.8 °C coho threshold, there were 19 exceedances out of 1,164 total samples taken over all the sampling years at this location. When compared to the 17°C steelhead threshold there were no exceedances found for any of the data. 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. There were 19 of 1,164 total samples that exceeded the 14.8 °C temperature evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency calculated from the equation 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: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 1685 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1164 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 19 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | When the data was compared to the 14.8 °C coho threshold, there were 19 exceedances out of 1,164 total samples taken over all the sampling years at this location. When compared to the 17°C steelhead threshold there were no exceedances found for any of the data (Hawthorne Timber Company, 2003). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Temperature objectives for COLD interstate waters, WARM interstate waters, and Enclosed Bays and Estuaries are as 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 thereto. A copy of this plan is included verbatim in the Appendix Section of this 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. At no time or place shall the temperature of any COLD water be increased by more than 5 F above natural receiving water temperature. At no time or place shall the temperature of WARM intrastate waters be increased more than 5 F above natural receiving water temperature. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The guideline used was from Sullivan et al. (2000) Published Temperature Thresholds-Peer Reviewed Literature which includes reviewed sub-lethal and acute temperature thresholds from a wide range of studies, incorporating information from laboratory-based research, field observations, and risk assessment approaches. This report calculated the 7-day Mean (maximum value of the 7-day moving average of the daily mean temperature) upper threshold criterion for coho salmon as 14.8°C and for steelhead trout as 17.0°C. The risk assessment approach used by Sullivan et al. (2000) suggests that an upper threshold for the for the 7-day average of 14.8°C for coho and 17.0°C for steelhead will reduce average growth 10% from optimum. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | There was 1 sampling location with 9 years of sampling measurements. Hobo-Temps were placed in the pools near the bottom and towards the deepest portion to record the in-stream temperatures. Instream and riparian measurements were taken at all monitoring locations. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was recorded for 9 years, from 1994 to 2002. Water temperature data were recorded at 90-minute intervals, generally from June to Mid-October. Stream temperatures were measured continuously with temperature data loggers (Onset Computer Corp. model HOBO-Temp and OST temperature loggers) in Class 1 streams throughout the property from 1994 to 2004. Hobo-temps allowed uninterrupted data collection to occur throughout the critical summer period. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Campbell Timberland Management submitted a QA/QC Information Summary. Installation of the temperature data logger (Onset Computer Corp. model HOBO-Temp and OST temperature loggers in Class 1 streams throughout the property devices occurred one day before the first day logged on the continuous temperature monitoring figures. This was done to allow the data loggers to reach equilibrium with the instream temperature regimes and to capture complete daily cycles. No information on equipment calibration, standard operating procedures or data protocols were included with the submittal. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||