| Water Body Name: | Bean Creek |
| Water Body ID: | CAR3041204119990222152251 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
132061 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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 is/are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. One of two 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. One of two 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. 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 233354 | ||||
| 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: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 304BEALOC to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.72524 to 0.72524. | ||||
| 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 304BEALOC. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 5/20/2009 to 5/20/2009. | ||||
| 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: | 233355 | ||||
| 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 304BEAMOR to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.867182 to 0.867182. | ||||
| 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 304BEAMOR. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 5/20/2009 to 5/20/2009. | ||||
| 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 |
131030 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| 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 State Water Boards Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California (the ISWEBE Plan) contains two bacteria water quality objectives applicable to the REC-1 beneficial use which were adopted on August 7, 2018: where the salinity level of a waterbody is equal to or less than 1 part per thousand 95 percent or more of the time, the E. coli bacteria objective applies; and where the salinity level of a waterbody is greater than 1 part per thousand 95 percent or more of the time, the Enterococci bacteria objective applies. These objectives supersede the fecal coliform water quality objective for water contact recreation uses. Therefore, the fecal coliform objective for water contact recreation is not applicable to this waterbody and those LOEs have been removed from this decision. However, one line of evidence (LOE) is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant and the non-contact recreation use. The single sample did not exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation. 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 samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation, 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: | 18845 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Bean Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 10/9/1991. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
89909 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Sedimentation/Siltation |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | San Lorenzo River Sediment |
| TMDL Project Code: | 243 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 02/19/2004 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.9 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The initial decision to place this water body segment-pollutant combination on the 303(d) list was made prior to 2006 and associated data and documentation are not held in an assessment database. As a result, there are no data associated with the LOE that is a placeholder for the original decision to add this water body segment/pollutant combination to the List. However, recent physical habitat and benthic invertebrate community data have been collected and are summarized in one LOE. Although none of the four samples have degraded biological community composition (EPT taxa richness less than 12), two of the four sediment size samples had more than 40 percent cover of deposited fine and sand sized sediment on the streambed. This supports the previous decision to add this water body segment/pollutant combination to the List. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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 four samples have more than 40 percent cover of deposited fine and sand sized sediment on the streambed. This supports the previous decision to add this water body segment/pollutant combination to the List. 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: | 3719 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sedimentation/Siltation | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95244 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | BIOLOGICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff evaluated sediment grain size and EPT taxa data that was collected following the SWAMP physical habitat and benthic invertebrate protocol from Bean Creek. At two of the four stations, deposited fine and sand (FS) sediments on the stream bed were greater than 40% cover. However, more than 12 EPT taxa (EPT richness) were present at all four stations. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Three papers summarizing numeric TMDL targets for benthic invertebrates and sediment indicators in the San Lorenzo River Watershed | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Central Coast Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) general water quality objective. Waters shall not contain settable material in concentrations that result in deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affects beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Loss of benthic invertebrate species diversity and altered community composition (based on the number of mayfly, stonefly and caddisfly taxa or EPT taxa richness) occurs when deposited fine and sand (FS) sediments on the stream bed exceeds 40% relative to Central Coast reference stream species composition and diversity (Herbst, D.B., et al, 2014 and Herbst, D.B., et al, 2011). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Three papers summarizing numeric TMDL targets for benthic invertebrates and sediment indicators in the San Lorenzo River Watershed | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Two monitoring locations: Bean Creek at Locateli Rd. (2008 and 2009), and Bean Creek at Morgan Runs (2008 and 2009). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected in the spring - early season of 2008 and 2009 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | None | ||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP protocols were followed for sample collection. SWAMP QAPP was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
72460 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 161 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Municipal and Domestic Supply or Agricultural Supply. 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 161 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Municipal and Domestic Supply or Agricultural Supply 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: | 18663 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 161 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 161 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 18680 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 161 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 161 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
72285 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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: | No new data were assessed.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eight out of 152 samples exceed the water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat. The Basin Plan general water quality objective for oxygen saturation states that the median value shall not fall below 85% saturation. Furthermore, the oxygen saturation objective is only applied ¿for waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use¿¿ and this water body is designated for Cold Freshwater Habitats. Therefore, the use support rating for oxygen saturation is set at 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 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. Eight out of 152 samples exceed the water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. In addition, the median value did not exceed the General Objective. 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: | 19816 | ||||
| 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: | 152 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 8 of 152 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
79958 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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: | No new data were assessed. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 153 samples exceed the water quality objective for Agricultural Supply. 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 153 samples exceed the water quality objective for Agricultural Supply 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: | 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: | 18585 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 153 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 153 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80054 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 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.
Bean Creek provides habitat for coho salmon and steelhead trout, which are listed as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 19898 summarizes 143 grab samples and none of those samples exceeded the evaluation guideline (optimum range for steelhead, Moyle, 1976) used to interpret the narrative water quality objective. LOE 53338 summarizes two years of continuous temperature measurements which are evaluated by calculating maximum weekly maximum temperature (MWMT). Both of the two MWMTs exceed the evaluation guideline (MWMT for Central Coast Coho, NOAA, 2012) used to interpret the narrative water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 143 grab samples and 2 of the 2 MWMTs exceeded the relevant evaluation guidelines used to interpret the narrative 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 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: | 53338 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two out of two samples exceed the evaluation guideline for temperature in this water body. Water temperature data submitted by the Lompico Watershed Conservancy from both of these sites showed that during the summer of 2005, the maximum weekly maximum temperature (MWMT) exceeded 16 degrees Celsius. The MWMT is calculated as an average and for the purpose of this assessment is counted as a single exceedance. These data were compiled by Donald Alley (fisheries biologist).
For reference, the MWMT also exceeded 18 degrees in two out of two samples. This is the EPA temperature criterion for non-core salmon and trout. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Data for temperature in San Lorenzo Creek (Monterey County) and other water bodies, May 2005-Aug. 2009 | ||||
| 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: | Per the Central Coast Coho Salmon Recovery Plan, Vol III, pages 55-56 (NOAA, 2012) population level temperature rating of 16 degrees C (temperature expressed as maximum weekly maximum temperature or MWMT) are protective of juvenile coho during rearing season (summer). This threshold is protective of chronic exposure to elevated water temperatures which can result decline and absence of juvenile coho in habitats. This is also consistent with the 'U.S. EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards' (USEPA 2003), in which the U.S. EPA recommends a criterion for the protection of moderate to high density summertime salmon and trout juvenile rearing (i.e., core juvenile rearing) of a maximum weekly maximum temperature (MWMT) of 16 degrees C. The MWMT is also known as the maximum 7-day average of daily maximums (7DADM). The 16 degrees C MWMT criterion is recommended to (1) safely protect juvenile salmon and trout from lethal temperatures; (2) provide upper optimal conditions for juvenile growth under limited food during the period of summer maximum temperatures and optimal temperatures for other times of the growth season; (3) avoid temperatures where juvenile salmon and trout are at a competitive disadvantage with other fish; (4) protect against temperature induced elevated disease rates; and (5) provide temperatures that studies show juvenile salmon and trout prefer and are found in high densities. Both the CDFG and NOAA strongly support the use of the USEPA temperature guidance for the purposes of water quality assessment in California. These criteria have been adopted by both Oregon and Washington state and used for 303(d) Listing and TMDL development by the North Coast Region Water Quality Control Board. Its use in other geographic settings is appropriate as it has been recognized that salmonid stocks do not tend to vary much in their life history thermal needs, regardless of their geographic location. There is not enough significant genetic variation among stocks or among species of salmonids to warrant geographically specific water temperature standards. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | EPA Region 10 Guidance for Pacific Northwest State and Tribal Temperature Water Quality Standards. EPA 910-B-03-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Office of Water, Seattle, WA. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | NOAA - Final Recovery Plan for Central California Coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Evolutionarily Significant Unit. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Two sites on Bean Creek: Site 14b-below Lockhart Gulch confluence, and Site 14c-Above MacKenzie confluence. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data collected daily from 6/19/2005-9/30/2005 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | There was no QAPP submitted with this data, but detailed letters outlining QA/QC procedures were provided by the city of Santa Cruz and Donald Alley. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19898 | ||||
| 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: | 143 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 143 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/9/1991-10/26/2005. Monitoring was not conducted on a set schedule but samples were collected approximately quarterly. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80046 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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: | No new data were assessed.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 38 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Sigler et al., 1984) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the 38 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Sigler et al., 1984) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial 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: | 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: | 19665 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA, 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR.] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-9/19/2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
77039 |
Region 3 |
Bean Creek |
||
| 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: | No new data were assessed.
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. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 153 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply, Municipal & Domestic Supply, Non-Contact Recreation and Water Contact Recreation water quality objectives, 16 of 153 samples exceed the Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitat water quality objectives. 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 153 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply, Municipal & Domestic Supply, Non-Contact Recreation and Water Contact Recreation water quality objectives, and 16 of 153 samples exceed the Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitat water quality objectives. Therefore 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: | 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: | 19741 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 153 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 153 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19757 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 153 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 16 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 16 of 153 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19758 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 153 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 153 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19760 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 153 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 153 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19759 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 153 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Santa Cruz County Environmental Health Monitoring Program (R3_SCCEH) data for Bean Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 153 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1971-1996 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: Santa Cruz County Environmental Health data 1997-2006 | |||||
| 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 Bean Creek was collected at 4 monitoring sites [ 304BNM_SCC - BEAN CR at MT HERMON RD (USGS), 304BNZ_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE ZAYANTE CR., 304BNL_SCC - BEAN CR. BELOW LOCKHART GULCH, 304BNG_SCC - BEAN CR. ABOVE GRAZING AREA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/15/1990-10/26/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | This monitoring program has been underway for thirty years, with changes over time to protocols, level of QA, and documentation. In general, QA documentation included with the dataset is minimal. However, data quality appears to be reasonably good. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||