| Pollutant: |
Specific Conductivity |
| 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: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
| |
| 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. |
| |
| |
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 154113, Specific Conductivity
|
Region 5 |
Upper Bear Creek (Siskiyou County) |
|
| |
| LOE ID: |
312430 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Specific Conductivity |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| 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 EPA CRAM Validation data for Upper Bear Creek (Siskiyou County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the upper limit of the range for SpecificConductivity. Additionally, 0 of the 1 samples fall within the range, and 1 of 1 samples fall below the threshold. |
| Data Reference: |
Field, Habitat data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 5. |
| |
| SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins specifies a range for specific conductance of 900 - 1600 uS/cm assessed as an annual average. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region, Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins; Fifth Edition. Revised May 2018 (with approved amendments) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 526BEADWx (Upper Bear Creek). |
| Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-07-09 and 2014-07-09 |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Central Coast Wetlands Group at Moss Landing Marine Labs. 2014. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Support for L2 Committee Priority Tool Development: Validation of Three CRAM Modules Task 3: Validation of the Depressional Wetland CRAM Module . |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Quality Assurance Project Plan for Support for L2 Committee Priority Tool Development: Validation of Three CRAM Modules Task 3: Validation of the Depressional Wetland CRAM Module
|
| |