Water Body Name: | Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
Water Body ID: | CAR3052001020080603162913 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
126228 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | No Source Analysis Available |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2035 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. A total of two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of 18 of 71 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Moyle 1976) applied to protect the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. In addition, A recent publication (Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Resources South of the Golden Gate, California (Becker, G.S and I.J Reining, October 2008) identifies Uvas Creek as having definite run or population and specifically cites the following from a 2002 draft DFG report: Fish upstream .... of the reservoir on Uvas Creek appear to be native strains, but they are resident rainbow trout, rather than anadromous steelhead. Therefore this temperature guideline is relevant to the waterbody. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the 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. A total of 18 of 71 samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17399 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 70 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 18 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 18 of 70 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (General Objective in 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: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 216913 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages of rainbow trout is 13-21 degrees Celsius (Moyle 1976). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
113136 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
Pollutant: | pH |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | No Source Analysis Available |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2035 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the Clean Water Act section 303(d) List under sections 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section, 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. Forty-three of the 72 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply, Contact and Non-contact Recreation beneficial uses. Twenty of the 72 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. 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. Forty-three of the 72 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply, Contact and Non-contact Recreation beneficial uses, 20 of the 72 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 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 removed from the section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17555 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 71 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 42 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 42 of 71 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
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: 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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17554 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 71 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 42 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 42 of 71 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
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: 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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 177687 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation (Section 3.3.2 Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) states that the pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 177649 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation (Section 3.3.2 Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) states that the pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 176787 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for municipal and domestic supply (Section 3.3.2 Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) states that the pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17553 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 71 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 42 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 42 of 71 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17539 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 71 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 20 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 20 of 71 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
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 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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 176964 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for cold fresh water habitat (Section 3.3.2 Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) states that the pH value shall neither be depressed below 7.0 nor raised above 8.5. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
131867 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects are being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, additional lines of evidence (LOEs) associating the Benthic Community Effects decision with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants other than benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment or habitat assessment LOEs are necessary to place a water body on the 303(d) List for Benthic Community Effects. Two lines of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. Zero of three benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. These data indicate that the waterbody is likely unimpaired for Benthic Community Effects and therefore no other pollutant LOEs need be associated with this decision at this time. 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 waterbody segment 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 three benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. Therefore, this water body is not exceeding the water quality threshold for the protection of the COLD beneficial use. The available information indicates that the waterbody/pollutant combination should not be placed on the 303(d) List of impaired waters at this time. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 232678 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 305UVCASC to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 1.022020427 to 1.15152916. | ||||
Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2020 Integrated Report for Region 3. | ||||
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. Region 3 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station 305UVCASC. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 6/29/2010 to 6/13/2018. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data collected following SWAMP QA protocols. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 232619 | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed data for 305UVASWA to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 1.121870518 to 1.121870518. | ||||
Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2020 Integrated Report for Region 3. | ||||
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. Region 3 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station 305UVASWA. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 4/30/2013 to 4/30/2013. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data collected following SWAMP QA protocols. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
113135 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of 70 samples exceed the water quality objective for cold freshwater habitat (Basin Plan) and zero of one sample exceeded the water quality objective for fish spawning (Basin Plan). Note that there is no difference between samples fractions ‘dissolved’ and ‘total,’ therefore sample and exceedance counts will be summed for the purpose of this decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. The data support the conclusion that the aquatic life beneficial use is fully supported. For the fish spawning beneficial use, the data is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of 70 samples exceed the objective for cold freshwater habitat and zero of one sample exceeded the objective for fish spawning. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 174462 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 173902 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17841 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 69 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 69 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Cold Water Habitat Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
113137 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (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. A total of two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Sample and exceedance counts for the lines of evidence with the fraction identified as “none” or “not recorded” are grouped together with those having the fraction “total”, based on the analytical method used. Once summed, a total of four of 21 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for cold freshwater habitat (Sigler et al. 1984) used to interpret the water quality objectives for the aquatic life beneficial use. The readily available data and information are insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. 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. 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. A total of four of 21 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for cold freshwater habitat 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: | 183135 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Reference Condition Management Plan data for Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Turbidity. | ||||
Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | 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: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Turbidities of 25 NTU or greater can cause a reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food (Sigler et al. 1984). | ||||
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: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (305UVCASC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-13 and 2018-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17521 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 20 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/7/2005-1/17/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
86056 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
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: | No new data were assessed.
The pollutant name was changed to ¿Ammonia¿ in the 2014 assessment cycle. This decision replaces the pollutant total ammonia. This decision contains all of the LOEs from the previous decision. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 79 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level, 2006) applied to protect the Municipal & Domestic Supply beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the 79 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level, 2006) applied to protect the Municipal & Domestic Supply beneficial use, 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: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17799 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 79 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 79 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia As N, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-3/13/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
72418 |
Region 3 |
Uvas Creek (above Uvas Reservoir) |
||
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: | No new data were assessed.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 79 samples exceed the Municipal & Domestic Supply water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the 79 samples exceed the Municipal & Domestic Supply 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: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17692 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 79 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(above res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 79 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B | |||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-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 Uvas Creek(above res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ UV-URA - Uvas Creek above Uvas Reservoir] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/7/2003-3/13/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||