Pollutant: |
Alkalinity as CaCO3 |
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. |
|
|
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: |
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. |
|
|
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: |
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. |
|
|
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. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 133903, Chromium
|
Region 8 |
Kitching Channel (Riverside County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
235942 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chromium |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed RWB8 So. CA Stormwater Monitoring Coalition data for Kitching Channel (Riverside County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chromium. |
Data Reference: |
Field, Habitat, Toxicity, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The dissolved chromium (III) criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is is hardness dependent as described in Table 1 of paragraph (b)(1). The value calculated when using a default hardness of 100 mg/L is 180 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: |
The dissolved chromium (III) criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is is hardness dependent as described in Table 1 of paragraph (b)(1). The value calculated when using a default hardness of 100 mg/L is 180 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). |
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 802S37697 (Kitching Channel Random SMC Site 37697). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-12 and 2012-07-12 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
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: |
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. |
|
|
Pollutant: |
Lead |
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. |
|
|
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: |
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. |
|
|
Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 133897, Oxygen, Dissolved
|
Region 8 |
Kitching Channel (Riverside County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
237441 |
|
Pollutant: |
Oxygen, Dissolved |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed RWB8 So. CA Stormwater Monitoring Coalition data for Kitching Channel (Riverside County) 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, Toxicity, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The dissolved oxygen content of surface waters shall not be depressed below 5 mg/L for waters designated WARM as a result of controllable water quality factors (Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana Basin, Chapter 4 Water Quality Objectives, Inland Surface Waters). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 802S37697 (Kitching Channel Random SMC Site 37697). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-12 and 2012-07-12 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
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: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 133899, Selenium
|
Region 8 |
Kitching Channel (Riverside County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
237819 |
|
Pollutant: |
Selenium |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Dissolved |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed RWB8 So. CA Stormwater Monitoring Coalition data for Kitching Channel (Riverside County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Selenium. |
Data Reference: |
Field, Habitat, Toxicity, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 5 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: 802S37697 (Kitching Channel Random SMC Site 37697). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-12 and 2012-07-12 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 133899, Selenium
|
Region 8 |
Kitching Channel (Riverside County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
237570 |
|
Pollutant: |
Selenium |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed RWB8 So. CA Stormwater Monitoring Coalition data for Kitching Channel (Riverside County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Selenium. |
Data Reference: |
Field, Habitat, Toxicity, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 5 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: 802S37697 (Kitching Channel Random SMC Site 37697). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-12 and 2012-07-12 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
|
Regional Board Conclusion: |
Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
|
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
|
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: |
|
|
State Board Decision Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 133900, Temperature, water
|
Region 8 |
Kitching Channel (Riverside County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
237848 |
|
Pollutant: |
Temperature, water |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
1 |
Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed RWB8 So. CA Stormwater Monitoring Coalition data for Kitching Channel (Riverside County) 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, Toxicity, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The temperature of waters designated WARM shall not be raised above 90 degrees F June through October or above 78 degrees F during the rest of the year as a result of controllable water quality factors (Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana Basin, Chapter 4 Water Quality Objectives, Inland Surface Waters). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 802S37697 (Kitching Channel Random SMC Site 37697). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-12 and 2012-07-12 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|
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: |
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. |
|
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 133898, pH
|
Region 8 |
Kitching Channel (Riverside County) |
|
|
LOE ID: |
237278 |
|
Pollutant: |
pH |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm 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 RWB8 So. CA Stormwater Monitoring Coalition data for Kitching Channel (Riverside County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. |
Data Reference: |
Field, Habitat, Toxicity, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
|
SWAMP Data: |
SWAMP |
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The pH of inland surface waters shall not be raised above 8.5 or depressed below 6.5 as a result of controllable water quality factors (The Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana Basin, Chapter 4 Water Quality Objectives, Inland Surface Waters). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 802S37697 (Kitching Channel Random SMC Site 37697). |
Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-12 and 2012-07-12 |
Environmental Conditions: |
|
QAPP Information: |
SWRCB. 2018. This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. |
|