| Water Body Name: | Arana Gulch |
| Water Body ID: | CAR3041205119990222133711 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
130157 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform |
| Final Listing Decision: | 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 |
| Reason for Delisting: | Applicable WQS attained; due to change in WQS |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
| 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 of the Listing Policy due to a change in water quality standards. 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. Consequently, the fecal coliform objective for water contact recreation is no longer applicable to this waterbody and those LOEs have been removed from this decision. Therefore, this waterbody is being removed from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4 of the Listing Policy due to a change in water quality standards. However, two lines of evidence (LOEs) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant and the non-contact recreation use. Therefore, 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. One of the 37 samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation. After review of the available data and information for the non-contact recreation beneficial use, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not 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. One of the 37 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 be removed from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4 of the Listing Policy due to a change in water quality standards. |
| 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: | 10642 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 150353 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Coliform, Fecal. The water quality threshold is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated for a 30-Day peroid. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 uses (Section 3.3.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) 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 for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 304ARA | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 . | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
121608 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) |
| 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: | The State Water Board’s 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. Because the salinity level of this waterbody is equal to or less than 1 part per thousand 95 percent or more of the time, the E. coli bacteria objective applies. Therefore, this waterbody is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.3 of the Listing Policy, as applicable, using the E. coli objective. In accordance with section 6.1.5.3 of the Listing Policy, data should be representative of the critical timing that the pollutant is expected to impact the waterbody. E.coli populations may fluctuate substantially on a daily, seasonal, or yearly basis. Lacking constant inputs, indicator bacteria do not persist in the environment for a long period and effects are of relatively short duration. As a result, the historic levels of E.coli in the waterbody may be a poor indicator of current risks to human health, particularly when more recent data are available to sufficiently assess the water quality standard. Additionally, water quality conditions in waterbodies may change as a result of management actions that have been implemented to address E.coli. Unrepresentative data may result in incorrectly placing or not placing a water body segment on the CWA section 303(d) List, which could result in the unnecessary expenditure of public resources or missing a human health problem. Historic lines of evidence for data collected prior to 2010 were evaluated pursuant to these considerations and were not used to assess water quality standards attainment because they do not meet the temporal representation requirements of section 6.1.5.3 of the Listing Policy. Therefore, this decision is based upon evaluation of the E. coli data collected since 2010 (see LOEs 149840, 149712, 149720, and 150213) which is most representative of existing conditions in the waterbody. Thirteen of the 37 samples collected since 2010 exceed the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. The data were collected between 2010 and 2018 and represent a range of hydrologic conditions (both wet and dry years). This sample count of data collected since 2010 is adequate to determine beneficial use support in accordance with the Listing Policy. Note, there are five lines of evidence summarizing historic data (data collected prior to 2010) compared to the USEPA’s Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria (USEPA, 1986). Ten of the 22 historic samples exceed the USEPA criteria set to protect for water contact recreation. These data are not used for making this decision. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Thirteen of the 37 samples collected since 2010 exceed the water quality objective for Water Contact Recreation. 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 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: | Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Thirteen of the 37 samples collected since 2010 exceed the water quality objective for Water Contact Recreation. 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 met. |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 149720 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 6 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all non-saline waters, is a Statistical Threshold Value (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL. The applicable STV shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent of the samples collected in a calendar month, calculated in a static manner (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 304-ARANA-22 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2011-05-07 and 2016-05-07 . | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 149840 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 3 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all non-saline waters, is a Statistical Threshold Value (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL. The applicable STV shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent of the samples collected in a calendar month, calculated in a static manner (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 304-ARANA-23 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2011-05-07 and 2013-05-04 . | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 18282 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli in freshwater is 235 MPN/100mL (as stated in Table 4, page 15) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork, 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/7/2005. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 10643 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 7 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli in freshwater is 235 MPN/100mL (as stated in Table 4, page 15) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 149712 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 2 of the 6 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all non-saline waters, is a Statistical Threshold Value (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL. The applicable STV shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent of the samples collected in a calendar month, calculated in a static manner (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 304-ARANA-21 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2011-05-07 and 2016-05-07 . | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 150213 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 9 of the 22 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all non-saline waters, is a Statistical Threshold Value (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL. The applicable STV shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent of the samples collected in a calendar month, calculated in a static manner (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 304ARA | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 . | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106681 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | San Lorenzo/Zayante Chlorpyrifos TMDL |
| TMDL Project Code: | 1060 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 11/25/2015 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from on the section 303(d) List under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 2 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005) set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 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 2 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005) set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. The San Lorenzo River Watershed Chlorpyrifos TMDL has been approved by the USEPA on November 25, 2015. 5. 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: | 161650 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Chlorpyrifos. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic organisms is 0.015 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game (with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005). | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 16348 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Sediment Chemistry Data from Region 3 Harbors, 2004 | |||||
| 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. (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) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch at La Fonda Ave] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-5/30/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
126937 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| 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)(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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Eight lines of evidence (LOEs) 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. The following is a summary of the sample and exceedances for each beneficial use: Based on LOEs summarizing un-ionized ammonia data, zero of the 28 samples exceed the water quality objective (Basin Plan) set to protect aquatic life. Based on LOEs summarizing total ammonia data (‘nitrogen, ammonia’ and ‘nitrogen as ammonia’) zero of the 13 samples exceed the EPA's Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria set to protect aquatic life. This sample size is insufficient to determine an applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. In accordance with Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, a minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported. Based on LOEs summarizing total ammonia data (‘nitrogen, ammonia’ and ‘nitrogen as ammonia’) zero of the 39 samples exceed the EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level set to protect municipal and domestic supply 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the samples exceed the water quality objectives and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List 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: | 183989 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2012 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 a lifetime of exposure.' | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9149 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) . | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 9148 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Health Advisory 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure." | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 219502 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 12 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N, Unionized. Although a total of 18 samples were collected, 6 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2 (Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/L (as N) in receiving waters (page 32). | ||||
| 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 (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-01-19 to 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 219324 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter 3, Section 3.3.2 (Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/L (as N) in receiving waters (page 32). | ||||
| 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 184477 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| 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 Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Total Ammonia criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 30-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is Temperature and pH dependent, and was calculated according to the formula listed in the Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 document. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-11 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 184326 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Total Ammonia criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 30-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is Temperature and pH dependent, and was calculated according to the formula listed in the Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 document. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-17 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 184405 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2012 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 a lifetime of exposure.' | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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 |
106678 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of four samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. 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. A total of zero of four samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of 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: | 158553 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Arsenic. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Arsenic is 10 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106687 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 158783 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Azinphos Methyl. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 Criterion Continuous Concentration for freshwater aquatic life is 0.01 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, EPA 2016) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
131881 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| 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. One line(s) of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data is/are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. One of one benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. However, a minimum of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples are needed to assess listing status. 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 one benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. The available information is insufficient to determine whether the waterbody/pollutant combination should 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 232643 | ||||
| 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: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 304PS0146 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 2 of 2 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.508239652 to 0.666842528. | ||||
| 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 304PS0146. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 6/18/2012 to 7/11/2012. | ||||
| 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 |
106679 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 160091 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Cadmium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for cadmium is 0.005 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 160272 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Cadmium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106708 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Carbophenothion |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 160427 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Carbophenothion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Carbophenothion. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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: | Drinking water notification levels are published by the Division of Drinking Water and are for chemicals for which there is no drinking water MCL. If a notification level is exceeded, local government notification is required and customer notification is recommended. The criteria for Carbophenothion (Trithion) is 0.007 mg/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | CDPH Archived Advisory Levels for Drinking Water. Archived Advisory Levels are currently considered Notification Levels. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106712 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Chromium |
| 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. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support ratings are set to 'insufficient information'. 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 161762 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chromium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-04-27 and 2017-09-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 161917 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chromium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for total chromium is 0.05 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106682 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Copper |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. A total of two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of 10 samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use and zero of 22 samples exceed the water quality objective for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of 10 samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use and zero of 22 samples exceed the water quality objective for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 162631 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Copper. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Copper criteria for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms is 1.300 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 163061 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 10 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Copper. Although a total of 22 samples were collected, 12 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-01-19 to 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106714 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Coumaphos |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 163281 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Coumaphos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Coumaphos. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for Coumaphos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.037 ug/L for invertabretes (chronic). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106683 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| 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 3.1 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. For lines of evidence where the fraction is none staff assumed that the fraction is total, based on the analytical method, and the sample and exceedance counts are summed for both fractions for the purpose of making this decision. None of the four samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Finlayson, 2004) applied to protect aquatic life beneficial uses. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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. 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 four samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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: | 16771 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
| 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. (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) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch at La Fonda Ave] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-5/30/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 164105 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Diazinon. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 freshwater chronic value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106684 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorvos |
| 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: | 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, and single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero water samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses and zero of two of water samples exceed the municipal supply evaluation guideline. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. 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. Zero of the zero water samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect for each aquatic life and zero of two water samples exceed the municipal guideline. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 164371 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorvos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dichlorvos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 USEPA IRIS one-in-a-million cancer risk estimate from oral exposure for dichlorvos is 0.1 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 164476 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorvos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0058 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106707 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Dicrotophos |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 164285 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dicrotophos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dicrotophos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for Dicrophos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.7 ug/L for invertebrates (chronic). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 164242 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dicrotophos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dicrotophos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 USEPA expected safe lifetime exposure limit in drinking water for Dicrotophos calculated using the IRIS Reference Dose, is 0.7 ug/L. This was calculated assuming 70 kg body weight, 2 liters/day water consumption, 20% relative source contribution from drinking water, and 0.0001 mg/kg/day as the reference dose. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Reference Summary (Various Pollutants) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106704 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Dimethoate |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under sections 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 are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of two water samples exceeded the USEPA aquatic life evaluation guideline. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. 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. 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 evaluation guidelines. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 164667 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dimethoate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dimethoate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106685 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 165135 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Disulfoton. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 USEPA drinking water health advisory for disulfoton is 0.7 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 165022 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Disulfoton. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for Disulfoton is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.01 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106686 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Dyfonate (Fonofos or Fonophos) |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 166759 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dyfonate (Fonofos or Fonophos) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fonofos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Fonofos is the maximum acceptable toxicant concentration (MATC) of 0.45 ug/L. The MATC is calculated as the geometric mean of the lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC) of 0.64 ug/L and the no observed effect concentration (NOEC) of 0.31 ug/L, as determined in a 21 day toxicity study with the water flea, Daphnia magna. Threshold values (LOEC and NOEC) are from USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106702 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Ethion |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 165895 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ethion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Ethion. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for Ethion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.028 ug/L for invertebrates (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 165712 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ethion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ethion. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 USEPA expected safe lifetime exposure limit in drinking water for Ethion, calculated using the IRIS Reference Dose, is 3.5 ug/L. This was calculated assuming 70 kg body weight, 2 liters/day water consumption, 20% relative source contribution from drinking water, and 0.0005 mg/kg/day as the reference dose. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Reference Summary (Various Pollutants) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106705 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Ethoprop |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 166228 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ethoprop | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ethoprop. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106709 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Fenitrothion |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 166327 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fenitrothion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fenitrothion. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for Fenitrothion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.087 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106710 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Fenthion |
| 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. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 166512 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fenthion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Fenthion. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for Fenthion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.013 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106689 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Malathion |
| 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: | 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. Zero of zero samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Faria et al., 2010) applied to protect aquatic life beneficial uses. In this case, some samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. Zero of two samples exceed the evaluation guideline for drinking water (USEPA drinking water health advisory). These sample sizes are insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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. 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 exceeded the evaluation guidelines and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. This sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 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: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 168383 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Malathion. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 USEPA drinking water health advisory for malathion is 500 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 169097 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Malathion. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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: | Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the four-day average concentration of malathion does not exceed 0.028 ug/L more than once every three years on the average (Faria et al., 2010). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: l. Organophosphate insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:1-48. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
130695 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Mercury |
| 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: | 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. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three LOEs summarize water samples: - Zero of four water samples exceed the mercury evaluation guideline (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, EPA 2016), set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. - Zero of four water samples exceed the mercury evaluation guideline (California Toxics Rule, 2000), set to protect for the commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms beneficial use. - Zero of four water samples exceed the mercury evaluation guideline (California Toxics Rule, 2000), set to protect for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. 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. 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. No water samples exceeded the evaluation guidelines, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 169264 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Human health risk associated with organism consumption is 0.051 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 169179 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The mercury criteria for the protection of human health from the consumption of water and organisms for mercury is 0.050 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 169448 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents known to be deleterious to fish or wildlife (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Criterion Continuous Concentration for freshwater aquatic life is 0.77 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, EPA 2016) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106703 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Methidathion |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under sections 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. Zero of two water samples exceeded the USEPA aquatic life evaluation guideline. Zero of two water samples exceed the USEPA drinking water health advisory level for municipal and domestic water supply. These sample sizes are insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. 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. 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 evaluation guidelines. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 169727 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methidathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methidathion. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Methidathion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.66 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 169767 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methidathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methidathion. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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: | Based on USEPA IRIS reference dose (RfD) as a drinking water level, the drinking water health advisory level for methidathion is 0.7 ug/L. This was calculated assuming 70 kg body weight, 2 liters/day water consumption, and 20% relative source contribution from drinking water. An additional uncertainty factor of 10 is used for Class C carcinogens. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106690 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Nickel |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. A total of three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of four samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use, zero of four samples exceed the water quality objective for the commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms beneficial use and zero of four samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of four samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use, zero of four samples exceed the water quality objective for the commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms beneficial use and zero of four samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the municipal and domestic supply beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 170231 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nickel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Human health risk associated with organism consumption is 4.6 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 170306 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nickel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The maximum contaminant level of nickel in public water systems shall be 0.1 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 170705 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nickel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
115601 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| 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)(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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Fourteen lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply. None of the samples exceed the Central Coast Region’s evaluation guideline for maximum nitrate concentration and the protection of aquatic life uses from bio-stimulatory or eutrophic effects (R3 NNE Technical Report, 2010). Where the fraction is none or not recorded, staff assumed that the fraction is dissolved, based on the analytical method. Consequently, samples reported with these two fractions are summed to determine the sample and exceedance count. Once summed, the sample count for pollutant names nitrogen, nitrate and nitrate meets the minimum of 26 samples needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.2 of the Listing Policy and the beneficial use is fully supported. However, the sample counts for nitrate/nitrite are insufficient to determine if the beneficial uses are fully supported. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the samples exceeded the water quality objectives and therefore do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List 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: | 171393 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2011-12-14 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 171542 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 172366 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 172075 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (as N) 10.0 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-05-07 and 2016-05-07 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 173235 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-05-07 and 2016-05-07 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 172623 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304-ARANA-23) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-05-07 and 2013-05-04 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 172245 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (as N) 10.0 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-05-07 and 2016-05-07 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 171778 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (as N) 10.0 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304-ARANA-23) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-05-07 and 2013-05-04 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 172241 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (as N) 10.0 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 172365 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-05-07 and 2016-05-07 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 171486 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) is 10. mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 18381 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork, 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/7/2005. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 9151 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 171503 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) is 10. mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2011-12-14 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106692 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Organophosphate Pesticides |
| 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: | 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. Zero out of two water samples exceed the aquatic life evaluation guideline for additive effects of chlorpyrifos and diazinon (Bailey et al., 1997). Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. 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. 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 two samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of 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: | 173291 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Organophosphate Pesticides | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Organophosphorus Pesticides. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 evaluation guideline for the protection of aquatic life from the additive effects of the organophophate pesticides chlorpyrifos and diazinon is one toxic unit equivalent. A toxic unit equivalent is equal to the sum of chlorpyrifos and diazinon from a single sample, each having their reported concentration divided their respective evaluation guideline prior to being summed. If this results in a value greater than one, the sample is considered to be in exceedance of the water quality standard. (Bailey et al., 1997). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Joint acute toxicity of Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos to Ceriodaphnia dubia. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106693 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| 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. Thirteen lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the 54 samples exceed the dissolved oxygen water quality objective for cold freshwater habitat (Basin Plan). One of the 29 samples exceeds 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. Previous decisions (pre-2020) included dissolved oxygen saturation LOEs as ancillary evidence. This decision will no longer include dissolved oxygen saturation and these LOEs will be retired next cycle . 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. Three of the 54 samples exceed the water quality objective for cold freshwater habitat and one of 29 samples exceed the water quality objective for fish spawning. None of these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List 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: | 12116 | ||||
| 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: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 18041 | ||||
| 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: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder, 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/6/2006. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 174713 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-28 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 174364 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 174558 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 23 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 174337 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 174366 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-28 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 174529 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 174415 | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 174504 | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 175177 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 12133 | ||||
| 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: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/25/2005. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 174538 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 23 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106706 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Phorate |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under sections 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. Zero of two water samples exceeded the USEPA aquatic life evaluation guideline. Zero of two water samples exceed the National Academy of Sciences drinking water health advisory for municipal and domestic water supply. These sample sizes are insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. 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. 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 evaluation guidelines. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 180054 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phorate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phorate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 179845 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phorate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phorate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that 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 National Academy of Sciences health advisory for phorate is 0.7 ug/L. This was calculated using the no-adverse-effect dosage of 0.01 mg/kg, assuming 70 kg body weight, 2 liters/day water consumption, 20% relative source contribution from drinking water, and divided by 100 for a factor of safety. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences - Volume I Drinking Water and Health | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106711 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Phosmet |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under sections 3.1 and 3.6 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. Zero of two water samples exceed the USEPA aquatic life evaluation guideline. Zero of two samples exceed the USEPA drinking water health advisory. These sample sizes are insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.1. 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. 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 evaluation guidelines. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 180421 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phosmet | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phosmet. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Based on USEPA IRIS reference dose (RfD) as a drinking water level, the drinking water health advisory level for phosmet is 140 ug/L. This was calculated assuming 70 kg body weight, 2 liters/day water consumption, and 20% relative source contribution from drinking water. An additional uncertainty factor of 10 is used for Class C carcinogens. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Reference Summary (Various Pollutants) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 180255 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phosmet | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phosmet. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Phosmet is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106695 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Selenium |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 181027 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Selenium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 181099 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Selenium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the maximum contaminant levels for primary drinking water standards specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Sections 64431 and 64433.2. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for selenium is 0.05 mg/L (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | California MCLs - Title 17 and Title 22 documents for 2019 - California Regulations Related to Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106696 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Silver |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 181785 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Silver. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion maximum concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
126106 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| 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)(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 eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of one of 52 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Moyle 1976) applied to protect the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. 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 one of 52 samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use 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: | 12132 | ||||
| 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: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 217116 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 217090 | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | 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 (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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 216995 | ||||
| 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 RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-29 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 18673 | ||||
| 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: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder, 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/6/2006. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 217004 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 12135 | ||||
| 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: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/25/2005. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 217005 | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | 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 (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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
DECISION ID |
106697 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Terbufos |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 156591 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Terbufos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Terbufos. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Terbufos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.03 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 156555 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Terbufos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Terbufos. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA drinking water health advisory for terbufos is 0.4 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2018 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106699 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Trichlorfon |
| 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: | This decision was made by SWRCB staff. |
| 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: | 183320 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trichlorfon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Trichlorfon. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The acceptable daily intake for Trichlorfon is 26 ug/l. This was calculated for a child assuming 10 kg body weight, 1 liter/day water consumption, 20% relative source contribution from drinking water, and 1.25 mg/kg/day as the reference dose. (National Academy of Sciences Drinking Water and Health, Volume 6, 1986) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences Health Advisories document 1986 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 183302 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trichlorfon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Trichlorfon. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Trichlorofon is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0057 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2011-02-24 to 2011-09-22 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106701 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Zinc |
| 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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (CWA) section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of 22 samples exceed the water quality objective for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of 22 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for the cold freshwater habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 182828 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 22 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 22 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Zinc. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106694 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| 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)(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. Thirty-two lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 47 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply, Contact and Non-contact Recreation beneficial uses. One of the 47 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 47 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply, Contact and Non-contact Recreation beneficial uses, one of the 47 samples exceed the maximum pH water quality objective 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 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: | 179366 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 178812 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| 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 SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-29 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 176790 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| 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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177446 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177023 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| 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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 179060 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 17 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177572 | ||||
| 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 RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-29 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 179000 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 179009 | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177026 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 179537 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 17 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177571 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 177231 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 178995 | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 179662 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-22) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177072 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 17 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177624 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| 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 MBNMS Snapshot Day data for Arana Gulch 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: | Non-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 (304-ARANA-21) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-05-02 and 2015-05-02 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Monterey Bay NMS. 2003. California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Coast Wide Snapshot Day 2003 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19016 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder, 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/6/2006. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 10661 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life 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: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/25/2005. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 10657 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19017 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder, 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/6/2006. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 10658 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 10674 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| 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: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/25/2005. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 10660 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 10676 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| 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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/25/2005. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19019 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder, 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/6/2006. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 10675 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 8/25/2005. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 10659 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 14 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 19018 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Coastal Watershed Council (Snapshot day monitoring) (R3_Snap) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Volunteer Monitoring Network Data. 2003-2006 | ||||
| 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 Arana Gulch was collected at 3 monitoring sites [ 304-ARANA-21 - Arana Creek At Harbor High fish ladder, 304-ARANA-22 - Arana Creek at Paul Sweet Rd and Maybe Lane, 304-ARANA-23 - Arana Creek At Mid-fork] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/17/2003-5/6/2006. Coastal Watershed Council Snapshot Day Monitoring is conducted annually. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | State 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: | 176975 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| 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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-29 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 177004 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 17 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 176721 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| 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 RWB3 CCAMP Dissolved Oxygen Study data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-09-29 and 2011-09-29 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106713 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Aluminum |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| 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 placement on the section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 4 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of 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. Two of the 4 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms beneficial use and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 157033 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The 4-day average for fish and water consumption is 0.087 mg/L (USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106688 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Lead |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| 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 placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 4 dissolved lead samples exceed the water quality objective aquatic life beneficial uses. Two of the 4 total lead samples evaluation guideline for Municipal and Domestic Supply. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two of the 4 total lead samples evaluation guideline for Municipal and Domestic Supply. These do exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 167807 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Lead. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 167951 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Lead. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Public Health Goal for lead in sources of drinking water is 0.0002 mg/L. (OEHHA 2009) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Public Health Goal for Lead in Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-03-23 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106698 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| Final Listing Decision: | 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 |
| 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 placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant in water samples. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results (or endpoints) but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location. Two of four water samples were toxic to test organisms (exhibited a significant increase in mortality, decrease in cell density, decrease in growth or reproduction compared to the laboratory control) and therefore exceeded the narrative general water quality objective for toxicity, set 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 for 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. Two of the 4 water samples were toxic to test organisms relative to the control and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| 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: | 23535 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
| 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. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (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: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch at La Fonda Ave] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-5/30/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 23541 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Plant Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Selenastrum capricornutum Growth (Cell Density) 4 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
| 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. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (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: | Significant reduction in cell count of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and cell count <80% of control. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch at La Fonda Ave]. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-5/30/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 148931 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 1 of the 2 samples collected by SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area for Arana Gulch exhibited toxicity. A sample may have multiple toxicity test results, but will only be counted once. A sample is defined as being collected on the same day, at the same location with the same lab sample ID (if provided). The following organisms and parameters were utilized for the toxicity tests: Ceriodaphnia dubia, for Young/female, Selenastrum capricornutum, for Total Cell Count, Ceriodaphnia dubia, for Survival, Pimephales promelas, for Survival, Pimephales promelas, for Biomass (wt/orig indiv) | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in 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. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (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 for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | SWAMP_Memo_Toxicity_Data_Intrepretation | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 station. Monitoring site: ( 304ARA ) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-02-24 and 2011-09-22. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 23540 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Pimephales promelas Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
| 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. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (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: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch at La Fonda Ave] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/3/2006-5/30/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
106700 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity |
| Final Listing Decision: | 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 |
| 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 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. 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, nine of the 33 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Sigler et al. 1984) used to interpret the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for 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. Nine of 33 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline and this exceeds 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 be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| 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: | 182905 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 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 (304PS0146) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-06-18 and 2012-07-11 | ||||
| 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: | 12131 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 183243 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB3 CCAMP Pajaro and Santa Cruz Area data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 23 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Turbidity. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, 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 (304ARA) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-19 and 2017-11-28 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP 2008 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
106680 |
Region 3 |
Arana Gulch |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | No new data were assessed for the 2020 cycle. 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. Where the fraction is none staff assumed that the fraction is total, based on the analytical method. Consequently, samples reported with these two fractions are summed to determine the sample and exceedance count. Once summed, the sample count meets the minimum of 26 samples needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 34 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) and the General Water Quality Objective set to protect aquatic life beneficial uses. Therefore the beneficial use rating is Fully Supporting. 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 34 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) and the General Water Quality Objective set to protect aquatic life beneficial uses and this does not exceed the allowable frequency 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: | 9150 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Arana Gulch to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Arana Gulch was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 304ARA-Arana Gulch below golf course] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/19/2005-3/9/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||