| Water Body Name: | Huasna River |
| Water Body ID: | CAR3123008219990304112828 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
81735 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia |
| 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: | The pollutant name was changed from ¿Unionized Ammonia¿ to ¿Ammonia¿ in the 2014 assessment cycle. This decision replaces the two previously approved decisions, one for each of the pollutants unionized ammonia and total ammonia. This decision contains all of the LOEs from those decisions in addition to new LOEs.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence (LOEs) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two LOEs summarize unionized ammonia data in which zero of the 12 samples exceed the Basin Plan general water quality objective for unionized ammonia set to protect aquatic life. Two LOEs summarize total ammonia data and zero of the 12 samples exceed the EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia in drinking water. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality 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, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50308 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia As N, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure." | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50318 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9750 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) . | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9749 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Health Advisory 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure." | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
81737 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| 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: | Benthic Community Effects is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating the Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. The single sample did not 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 Benthic Community Effects in this water segment 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. The single sample did not exceed the water quality objective. However, this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. 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 there is not enough information showing that applicable water quality standards are being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 54524 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The IBI score in this water body was above 40 and therefore not below the impairment threshold of the Southern California IBI. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation 2007 2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores of 39 or less are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams. Environmental Management. Volume 35, number 1 (2005): pp. 1-13 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Surveys done at the following station: 312HUAxxx-Huasna River at School Road | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Survey done on April 4, 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data were collected following SWAMP QA Protocols for the Central Coast Ambient Monitoring Program (Santa Maria Rotation). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74385 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Boron |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. Note, the water quality objective is for total boron and the data for dissolved and total boron are both compared to this objective. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9781 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Boron. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3.4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for boron for irrigation supply is 0.75 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/13/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50300 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Boron, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3-4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for boron for irrigation supply is 0.75 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9763 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Boron, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3.4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for boron for irrigation supply is 0.75 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 2/15/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
81790 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Chloride |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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 pollutant. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses 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 the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are being met. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50301 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when chloride exceeds 106 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9764 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when chloride exceeds 106 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74818 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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 pollutant. Zero of the 11 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) used to interpret the narrative water quality objective for bio-stimulation risk and aquatic life beneficial uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 11 samples exceed the evaluation guideline 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 the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are being met. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9765 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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 (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50319 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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 (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-8/29/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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 |
81720 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
The sample size for the evaluation guideline for E. coli is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 9 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986) set to protect for water contact recreation (i.e. swimming, wading etc.). Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of the 9 samples exceed the evaluation guideline 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50314 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli in freshwater is 235 MPN/100mL (as stated in Table 4, page 15 of the USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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 |
74542 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
The sample size for the evaluation guideline for fecal coliform is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of 12 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for contact recreation (i.e. swimming) and 0 of 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of 12 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for contact recreation (i.e. swimming) and 0 of 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation. Neither of these 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11748 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50313 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 200 MPN/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN/100 ml. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11747 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 200 MPN/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN/100 ml. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50316 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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 |
84639 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 12 nitrate samples exceed the water quality objectives for the Agricultural Supply or the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use. Zero of the 9 nitrate samples exceed the water quality objective for Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use. Zero of the 9 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the water quality objectives for the Agricultural Supply or the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use. Zero of the 9 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the water quality objective for Warm Freshwater Habitat. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 nitrate samples exceed the water quality objectives for the Agricultural Supply or the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use. Zero of the 9 nitrate samples exceed the water quality objective for Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use. Zero of the 9 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the water quality objectives for the Agricultural Supply or the Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial use. Zero of the 9 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the water quality objective for Warm Freshwater Habitat. These do 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50321 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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 (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Technical Approach to Develop Nutrient Numeric Endpoints for California. U.S. EPA Region IX. State Water Resources Control Board. 68-C-02-108-To-111 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50311 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 10.0 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50320 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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 (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Technical Approach to Develop Nutrient Numeric Endpoints for California. U.S. EPA Region IX. State Water Resources Control Board. 68-C-02-108-To-111 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9779 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50310 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (NO3 as N) incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 10.0 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9766 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50303 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50304 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3-4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for nitrate + nitrite for livestock watering is 100 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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 |
81846 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 9 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 9 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, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50305 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3-4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for nitrite for livestock watering is 10 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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 |
86238 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 5 samples exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in Warm Freshwater Habitats. The Basin Plan general water quality objective for oxygen saturation states that the median value shall not fall below 85% saturation. However, the oxygen saturation objective is only applied ¿for waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use¿¿ and this water body is designated for Warm Freshwater Habitats. Therefore, the saturation data is used only as supporting information and the use support rating for this pollutant is set at insufficient information. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 5 samples exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in Warm Freshwater Habitats 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 and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are met or 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50322 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 13587 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 13603 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50323 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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 |
81791 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Sodium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses 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 the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are being met. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50307 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Sodium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when sodium exceeds 69 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9780 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Sodium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when sodium exceeds 69 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
81789 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Note that the pollutant name for the older LOEs and decisions is electrical conductivity. This was an error and the pollutant name should have always been specific conductivity. For this reason, the pollutant name was changed for this decision and sample and exceedance counts are summed for LOEs with both pollutant names in this assessment for specific conductivity. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 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, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are being met. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50302 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3000 uS/cm in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11749 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
81845 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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. Zero of the 9 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Shoup and Wahl 2009) used to interpret the Warm Freshwater Habitat 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 9 samples exceed the evaluation guideline 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 the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are being met. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50325 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Turbidities of 40 NTU or greater can cause a reduction in piscivorous fish (largemouth bass) growth due to interference with their ability to find food (Shoup, D.E. and Wahl D.H., 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | The Effects of Turbidity on Prey Selection by Piscivorous Largemouth Bass | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-8/29/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 13605 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/13/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74308 |
Region 3 |
Huasna River |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Ten lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Five beneficial uses are assessed. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Agriculture, Drinking Water, Recreation, and Warm Freshwater Habitats. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the water quality objectives 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 the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if water quality standards are being met. |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11750 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11766 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| 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: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50315 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3 (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50306 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Region Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50324 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5 (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50312 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3 (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 50317 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Maria Rotation field data 2007-2008 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3 (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/29/2007-1/14/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11767 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11768 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 11765 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Santa Maria (SantaMaria) data for Huasna River to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Huasna River was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 312HUA-Husana River at Husana Townsite Road] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/15/2000-5/3/2000. Santa Maria watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. Toxicity monitoring is conducted twice during the rotation year (winter and summer) at a subset of sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||