Final California 2010 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 1 - North Coast Region

Water Body Name:	Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA
Water Body ID:	CAR1142503219990615082353
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	13300	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2012
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Indicator bacteria (which includes enterococcus, E. Coli, fecal coliform, and total coliform) in the Geyserville Hydrologic Sub-Area (HSA) is being considered for placement and removal from the Section 303(d) List in 3 parts: for the mainstem Russian River from the railroad bridge to the Highway 101 bridge, for unnamed Stream 1 on Fitch Mountain, and for the remainder of the Geyserville HSA. (A) For the mainstem Russian River from the railroad bridge to the Highway 101 bridge, this pollutant is being considered for removal from the Section 303(d) List under Section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Ten lines of evidence (LOEs 6120, 5943, 5941, 6119, 7110, 5936, 6118, 6117, 7111, and 5935) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not delist). This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: (1) Combined, 1 of 52 enterococcus, 0 of 106 E. Coli, 56 of 116 fecal coliform, and 0 of 189 total coliform samples exceed the evaluation guidelines. The 56 of 116 fecal coliform samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. (2) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4. (3) The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of Section 6.1.5. (4) Pursuant to Section 4.11, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. (B) For Stream 1 on Fitch Mountain, this pollutant is being considered for placement on the Section 303(d) List under Section 3.2. Four lines of evidence (LOEs 6107, 6106, 6105, and 6103) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to list). This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: (1) Six of 9 single sample enterococcus, 3 of 9 single sample E. Coli, 7 of 7 median fecal coliform, and 0 of 12 singel sample total coliform samples exceed the evaluation guidelines. The 6 out of 9 single sample enterococcus and 7 out of 7 median fecal coliform samples exceed the evaluation guidelines, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (2) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4. (3) The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of Section 6.1.5. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. (C) For the remainder of the Geyserville HSA, this pollutant is being considered for placement on the Section 303(d) List under Section 3.2. Twenty lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not list). This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: (1) Combined, 9 of 628 samples exceed the evaluation guidelines, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 105 per the binomial distribution described in Section 3.2. (2) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4. (3) The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of Section 6.1.5. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11, 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, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that: (A) For the mainstem Russian River from the railroad bridge to the Highway 101 bridge, the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being attained. (B) For Stream 1 on Fitch Mountain, the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are not being attained and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem (C) For the remainder of the Geyserville HSA, the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5907

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 81 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Camp Rose Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 0 to 98 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 1997 - 2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

Summer 2008 Russian River Bacteria Data. Downloaded July 23, 2008 from http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/water_issues/programs/water_quality_sampling/russian_river.shtml. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample E. coli levels exceed 235 MPN / 100 ml. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Camp Rose Beach near Healdsburg, upstream of the river bend near the well head. Samples were collected from the center of the main river flow.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months. Samples for 2002-2003 and 2005-2007 were collected from Memorial Day to Labor Day. Samples for 2008 were collected from May to July. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6101

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 27 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, Camp Rose, and Almond Way exceed the evaluation guideline. At Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, 9 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 4.2 to 23.8 MPN / 100 ml. At Camp Rose, 9 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 7.5 to 59.1 MPN / 100 ml. At Almond Drive, 9 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 2 to 73.8 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

Staff Report Regarding Russian River Bacterial Water Quality Monitoring in the Vicinity of Fitch Mountain Sonoma County, California. April through September, 1995. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 3 sites in the Fitch Mountain reach: Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, Camp Rose Beach, and Almond Way. Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive is located upstream of a small stream that enters the Russian River at Redwood Drive. Samples were collected in well mixed flowing water, either in midstream or near the shore.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 9 to July 5, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6214

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

All 2 of the 2 E. coli samples from Foss Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 121,700 to 30,700 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6115

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 2 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Stream 2 in the Fitch Mountain area exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 1 to 2 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from a unnamed tributary to the mainstem Russian River, designated as Stream 2. Stream 2 enters the Russian River about 1 mile downstream of Redwood Drive in the Fitch Mountain area. Stream 2 was sampled at Hilltop Drive.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly on May 15 and May 22, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6119

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 10 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 8 to 62 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 4 sites along Healdsburg Memorial Beach: at the upstream end of the beach immediately downstream of the automobile bridge, in the area designated for young children to swim, at the downstream end of the swim area, and from the gravel bar at the fishermans beach which is immediately downstream of the dam. Samples were collected in well mixed flowing water, either in midstream or near the shore. Data from samples collected on the same day at more than one of these sites were averaged.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly on May 9 and July 5, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

7110

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 13 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Samples concentrations range from 8.6 to 31.3 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Data are summarized in the "Russian River Pathogen Data Report" of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected once every several days from May 17 to June 28, 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The quality assurance information for these data is unknown.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6106

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Three of the 9 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Stream 1 in the Fitch Mountain area exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 9 to 1,652 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from a unnamed tributary to the mainstem Russian River, designated as Stream 1. Stream 1 enters the Russian River at Redwood Drive in the Fitch Mountain area. Stream 1 was sampled at 2 locations. Data from the 2 locations were averaged.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 9 to July 5, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5941

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 83 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 0 to 111 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 2002 - 2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach near Healdsburg, in front of lifeguard stand 3 at the downstream end of the swim area. Samples were collected as far into the main river flow as possible while wading.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months from Memorial Day to Labor Day in 2002-2003 and 2005-2007. Samples for 2008 were collected from May to July. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches. Prepared by Cathy Goodwin, NCRWQCB - July 21, 1999, July 29, 1999, May 2005, and May 22, 2007. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5934

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 37 Enterococcus samples from the Russian River at Camp Rose Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 10 to 41 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 2006-2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels. In no case shall coliform concentrations in waters of the North Coast Region exceed the following: In waters designated for contact recreation (REC-1), the median fecal coliform concentration based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period shall not exceed 50 MPN* / 100 ml, nor shall more than 10% of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN / 100 ml. At all areas where shellfish may be harvested for human consumption (SHELL), the fecal coliform concentration throughout the water column shall not exceed 43 MPN / 100 ml for a 5-tube decimal dilution test or 49 MPN / 100 ml when a three-tube decimal dilution is used. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample Enterococcus levels exceed 61 MPN / 100 ml.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and Labor Day in 2006 to 2008. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6102

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 37 Enterococcus samples from the Russian River at Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, Camp Rose, and Almond Way exceed the evaluation guideline. At Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, 10 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 1 to 7 MPN / 100 ml. At Camp Rose, 13 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 11 to 50 MPN / 100 ml. At Almond Drive, 14 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 0 to 36 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample Enterococcus levels exceed 61 MPN / 100 ml. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 30 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6098

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 14 Enterococcus samples from the Russian River at Geyserville exceeds the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from less than 0 to 22 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Geyserville upstream of the Highway 128 bridge. Samples were collected in well mixed flowing water, either in midstream or near the shore.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 30 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6107

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six of the 9 Enterococcus samples from the Russian River at Stream 1 in the Fitch Mountain area exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 9 to 201 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 30 to July 11, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

7109

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 13 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Camp Rose Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Samples concentrations range from 0 to 10.9 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Data are summarized in the "Russian River Pathogen Data Report" of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Camp Rose Beach.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected once every several days from May 17 to June 28, 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The quality assurance information for these data is unknown.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6097

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 9 E. coli samples from the Russian River at Geyserville exceeds the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 1 to 324 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 9 to July 5, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5936

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

104

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

In total between 1992 and 2008, of the 104 median fecal coliform or median e. coli samples collected from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach, 49 exceed the objective.

Fecal coliform samples were collected from 1980 to 2001. Of the 117 fecal coliform samples collected, 57 median fecal coliform concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 57 median values, 44 exceed the objective. The median values ranged from 49 to 240 MPN / 100 ml.

From 2002 to 2008, e.coli samples were collected while fecal coliform samples were not collected. Since e. coli is one of the group of bacteria that comprise the fecal coliform group, it is logical that if median e.coli concentrations for any 30-day period are greater than 50 MPN / 100 ml, then the median fecal coliform concentrations for any 30-day period will also be greater than 50 MPN / 100 ml. Of the 71 e. coli samples collected,
47 median e. coli concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 47 median values, 5 exceed the objective. E.coli median values range from 10 to 53 MPN / 100 ml.

The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 1980 to 2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach near Healdsburg. Samples collected in 2001, from May to June 11, 2002, and from May to June 26, 2007, were collected from the west bank. All the rest of the samples were collected from the east bank in front of lifeguard stand 3 at the downstream end of the swim area. Samples were collected as far into the main river flow as possible while wading.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected once in June 1980, October 1986, June 1988, and once a month from June to August 1989. In 1987-1994, 1997-2003, and 2005-2006, samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and Labor Day. In 2007, samples were collected from July 3 to August 7. In 2008, samples were collected from Memorial Day to July 15. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6105

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Of the 12 fecal coliform samples collected from the Russian River at Stream 1 in the Fitch Mountain area, 7 median fecal coliform concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 7 median values, all 7 exceed the objective. Median values range from 240 to 1,600 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 9 to July 11, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5943

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 38 Enterococcus samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceeds the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from less than 10 to 109 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 2006-2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample Enterococcus levels exceed 61 MPN / 100 ml.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and Labor Day in 2006 to 2007. Samples for 2008 were collected from May to July. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6113

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Of the 5 fecal coliform samples collected from the Russian River at Stream 2 in the Fitch Mountain area, 1 median fecal coliform concentration value was calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 1 median value, none exceed the objective. The median value is 8 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to May 22, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6100

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Of the 54 fecal coliform samples collected from the Russian River at Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, Camp Rose Beach, and Almond Way, there are 43 median fecal coliform concentration values calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 43 median values, 3 exceed the objective. Two of the exceedances occurred at the Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive site with median values of 140 and 80 MPN / 100 ml. The third exceedance occurred at the Almond Way site with a median value of 80 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6096

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Of the 19 fecal coliform samples collected from the Russian River at Geyserville, 15 median fecal coliform concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 15 median values, 1 exceeded the objective by exceeding 400 MPN / 100 ml during 20% of a 30-day period with a value of 540 MPN / 100 ml. In other words, there was one instance where the objective was exceeded more than 10% of the time; it was exceeded 20% of the time. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6120

Pollutant:

Enterococcus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 14 Enterococcus samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 7 to 21 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 30 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6118

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Of the 20 fecal coliform samples collected from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach, 12 median fecal coliform concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 12 median values, 7 exceed the objective. Median value concentrations range from 30 to 130 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6095

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 19 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Geyserville exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 50 to 1,601 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample total coliform levels exceed 10,000 MPN / 100 ml. *Note: MPN is the most probable number of coliform units.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5882

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

153

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 153 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Camp Rose Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 20 to 4,352 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 1997 - 2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample total coliform levels exceed 10,000 MPN / 100 ml.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and Labor Day in 1997-2003, and 2005-2007. Samples for 2008 were collected from May 27, 2008 to July 15, 2008. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6099

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 54 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, Camp Rose, and Almond Way exceed the evaluation guideline. At Fitch Mountain at Redwood Drive, 15 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 50 to 2,401 MPN / 100 ml. At Camp Rose, 19 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 30 to 1,601 MPN / 100 ml. At Almond Drive, 20 samples were collected with concentrations ranging from 30 to 2,401 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6215

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

All 2 of the 2 total coliform samples collected in Foss Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations are greater than 240,000 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6112

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 5 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Stream 2 in the Fitch Mountain area exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 110 to 350 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to May 22, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

7108

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 14 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Camp Rose Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Samples concentrations range from 866.4 to 2,419.2 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Data are summarized in the "Russian River Pathogen Data Report" of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Camp Rose Beach.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected once every several days from May 17 to June 28, 2007. One sample was also collected on August 9, 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The quality assurance information for these data is unknown.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6117

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 20 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 90 to 2,401 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from April 25 to September 6, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

7111

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 18 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Samples concentrations range from 152.3 to 2,419.2 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Data are summarized in the "Russian River Pathogen Data Report" of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected once every several days from July 30 to August 9, 2004, and from May 17 to June 28, 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The quality assurance information for these data is unknown.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6103

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 12 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Stream 1 in the Fitch Mountain area exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from 130 to 2,401 MPN / 100 ml. Samples were collected by Regional Water Board staff as part of a targeted sampling event on the Russian River around Fitch Mountain. Data are summarized by Goodwin (1997).

Data Reference:

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The bacteriological quality of waters of the North Coast Region shall not be degraded beyond natural background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected weekly from May 9 to July 11, 1995.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the study design methods described by Goodwin (1997).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5935

Pollutant:

Total Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

151

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 151 total coliform samples from the Russian River at Healdsburg Memorial Beach exceed the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations ranged from 23 to 8,164 MPN / 100 ml. The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 1997 - 2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches" (DHS 2006): Beach posting is recommended when single sample total coliform levels exceed 10,000 MPN / 100 ml.

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and Labor Day in 1997 to 2003, and 2005 to 2007. Samples for 2008 were collected from May 27, 2008 to July 15, 2008. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13300, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

5906

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

100

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

In total between 1992 and 2008, of the 100 median fecal coliform or median e. coli samples collected from the Russian River at Camp Rose Beach, none exceed the objective.

Fecal coliform samples were collected from 1997 to 2001. Of the 69 fecal coliform samples collected, 47 median fecal coliform concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 47 median values, none exceed the objective. The median values ranged from 10 to 46 MPN / 100 ml.

From 2002 to 2008, e.coli samples were collected while fecal coliform samples were not collected. Since e. coli is one of the group of bacteria that comprise the fecal coliform group, it is logical that if median e.coli concentrations for any 30-day period are greater than 50 MPN / 100 ml, then the median fecal coliform concentrations for any 30-day period will also be greater than 50 MPN / 100 ml. Of the 77 e. coli samples collected,
53 median e. coli concentration values were calculated based on a minimum of not less than 5 samples for any 30-day period. Of these 53 median values, none exceed the objective. E.coli median values range from 10 to 41 MPN / 100 ml.

The samples were collected by staff of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The data for 1980 to 2007 are presented in the Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database (ICE 2008). The data for 2008 are presented by the Regional Water Board (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Russian River Pathogen Data Report of the Russian River Pathogen Project Database. Information Center for the Environment. Version 1. Beta. 2008. http://rrpp.ice.ucdavis.edu/

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health.

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

The samples were generally collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and Labor Day from 1997 to 2003 and from 2005 - 2007. In 2008, samples were collected once a week during the summer months between Memorial Day and July 15. The samples were often collected on the same day of the week and at the same time of day.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected in accordance with the "Protocol for Conducting Russian River Bacteriological Sampling at Summer Recreational Beaches" (Goodwin 2007).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	5918	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Sedimentation/Siltation
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)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Agriculture \| Agriculture-grazing \| Agriculture-storm runoff \| Bridge Construction \| Channel Erosion \| Channelization \| Construction/Land Development \| Disturbed Sites (Land Develop.) \| Drainage/Filling Of Wetlands \| Erosion/Siltation \| Geothermal Development \| Irrigated Crop Production \| Natural Sources \| Nonirrigated Crop Production \| Nonpoint Source \| Range Grazing-Riparian \| Range Grazing-Upland \| Removal of Riparian Vegetation \| Resource Extraction \| Silviculture \| Specialty Crop Production \| Streambank Modification/Destabilization \| Surface Runoff
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	For sedimentation/siltation, the 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. For turbidity, this waterbody is being considered for removal from the Section 303(d) List under Section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section 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. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list for sedimentation/siltation (i.e., sufficient justification to not de-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) Ten of the 18 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective. At least 28 samples are needed before a pollutant can be considered for removal from the list using the frequencies presented in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. The above data were assessed by the State Water Board as part of the 2006 303(d) List Update. No new data were assessed by the Regional Water Board for the 2008 Integrated Report. This decision is now listed as revised for 2008 due to combination of the sedimentation/siltation and turbidity pollutants. Otherwise, the decision has not changed.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This is a decision made by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the USEPA in 2006 . No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for 2008. The decision has not changed expect to combine the sedimentation/siltation and turbidity pollutants.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5918, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

4764

Pollutant:

Sedimentation/Siltation

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Unspecified

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5918, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

1745

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

By combining the data from the three sampling sites there were 10 samples out of the 18 samples that were above the evaluation guideline. The exceedances ranged from 30.5 NTU up to 356 NTU (Sandler, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Basin Plan: The suspended sediment load and suspended sediment discharge rate of surface waters shall not be altered in such a manner as to cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Turbidity shall not be increased more than 20 percent above naturally occurring background levels. Allowable zones of dilution within which higher percentages can be tolerated may be defined for specific discharges upon the issuance of discharge permits or waiver thereof. Water shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline that has been used to determine turbidity exceedance is from published-peer reviewed paper, "The Effects of Chronic Turbidity on Density and Growth of Steelheads and Coho Salmon", John W Sigler (1984). The guideline is "In our studies, as little as 25 NTUs of turbidity caused a reduction in fish growth."

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

There were three sampling locations along the Russian River, one at Healdsburg, and two at Cloverdale. They are as follows:
-Sample site RUS070 is located at the Healdsburg Veteran's beach, Healdsburg.
-Sample site RUS080 is located at the Cloverdale 1st St. bridge, Cloverdale.
-Sample site RUS090 is located at the Cloverdale River Park, Cloverdale.

Temporal Representation:

RUS070 was sampled once a month January through April 2003. RUS080 and RUS090 were sampled once a month, January through May 2003, and in July and August 2003. Samples were taken on the same days of the month at each location.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Draft QAPP for Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Project for the Community Clean Water Institute.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	17499	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Aldrin \| Atrazine \| Azinphos, Ethyl (Ethyl Guthion) \| Bolstar \| Carbofuran \| Chlordane \| Chlorothalonil \| Chlorpyrifos \| Chlorpyrifos, methyl \| Ciodrin \| Dacthal \| Demeton s \| Dichlofenthion \| Dichlorvos \| Dieldrin \| Dimethoate \| Dioxathion \| Dyfonate (Fonofos or Fonophos) \| Endrin \| Endrin Ketone \| Ethion \| Ethoprop \| Famphur \| Fenchlorphos \| Fenitrothion \| Fensulfothion \| Fenthion \| Glyphosate \| Heptachlor \| Heptachlor epoxide \| Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB \| Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), alpha \| Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), beta \| Leptophos \| Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) \| Merphos \| Methidathion \| Methoxychlor \| Methyl Parathion \| Mevinphos \| Molinate \| Naled \| Oxadiazon \| Oxychlordane \| Phorate \| Phosmet \| Phosphamidon \| Prometon (Prometone) \| Prometryn \| Propazine \| Secbumeton \| Simazine \| Simetryn \| Sulfotep \| Tedion \| Terbufos \| Terbuthylazine \| Terbutryn \| Tetrachlorvinphos \| Thiobencarb/Bolero \| Thionazin \| Tokuthion \| Toxaphene \| Trichlorfon \| Trichloronate \| beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH) \| cis-Nonachlor \| delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH) \| o,p'-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane)) \| o,p'-DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) \| p,p'-DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) \| p,p'-DDE \| p,p'-DDMU \| trans-Nonachlor
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:	These pollutants are being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples in LOE #30154 exceed the water quality objective.The pollutants in LOE #29953 do not have water quality objectives and, therefore, a decision could not be made. The samples were analyzed for 97 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 97 pesticide analytes, 2 to 19 samples were collected. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008). 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 3716 samples for both LOEs, #29953, without criteria, or LOE #30154 with criteria, exceeded the water quality 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 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17499, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

30154

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

3716

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 3,716 pesticide samples collected in the mainstem Russian River exceed the objective as all of the samples were either measured as non-detect or were measured as detected but not quantified with reporting limits below objectives or evaluation guidelines. The samples were analyzed for 97 pesticides, pesticide constituents, isomers, or metabolites. For each of the 97 pesticide analytes, 2 to 19 samples were collected. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no bioaccumulation of pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life. Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the limiting concentrations set forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15, Article 4, Section 64444, and listed in Table 3.2 of the Basin Plan.
No evaluation guidelines for the dissolved fractions of the pesticides assessed for this waterbody for the Municipal & Domestic Supply beneficial use could be found that meet the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Hexachlorocyclohexane, alpha (0.0026 ug/l)
Hexachlorocyclohexane, beta (0.0091ug/l)
Aldrin (0.000049 ug/l)
Atrazine (0.001 ug/l)
Carbofuran (0.04 mg/l)
Chlordane (0.0001 ug/l)
Chlorpyrifos (0.083 ug/l)
Dacthal (70 ug/l)
Dieldrin (0.00014 ug/l)
Endrin (0.002 ug/l)
Glyphosate (700 ug/l)
Heptachlor (0.01 ug/l)
Heptachlor epoxide (0.01 ug/l)
Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB (0.001 ug/l)
Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) (.98 ug/l)
Methoxychlor (0.03 mg/l)
Molinate (0.02 mg/l)
Simazine (0.04 mg/l)
Thiobencarb/Bolero (0.07 mg/l)
Toxaphene (0.003 mg/l)

Guideline 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

California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 4 locations as follows: (1) at Cloverdale (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCLO1), (2) downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant (SWAMP Station ID 114CLOSTP), (3) at Alexander Valley Bridge (SWAMP Station ID 114RRALEX), and (4) at Healdsburg Memorial Beach (SWAMP Station ID 114RRHMB1). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

At the Alexander Valley Bridge site, samples were collected over 2 site visits at each site during June 2001. At the Cloverdale and Healdsburg Memorial Beach sites, samples were collected over 22 site visits at each site from June 2001 to June 2006. At the site downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant, samples were collected over 5 site visits from October 2004 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 17499, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

29953

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

3716

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	12339	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Aluminum
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. Four out of 48 aluminum samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) Four of the 48 samples exceeded the aluminum objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 5 exceedances 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, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12339, Aluminum	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25385

Pollutant:

Aluminum

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Four of the 48 aluminum samples collected from the mainstem Russian River exceed the objective. Sample concentrations range from 7.42 to 1,787.00 ug/L. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The Maximum Contaminant Level for aluminum is 1.0 mg/l (1,000 ug/L).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 4 locations as follows: (1) at Comminski Station (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCOMM), (2) at Cloverdale (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCLO1), (3) downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant (SWAMP Station ID 114CLOSTP), and (4) at Healdsburg Memorial Beach (SWAMP Station ID 114RRHMB1). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

At the Comminski Station, samples were collected over 2 site visits at each site during June 2001. At the Cloverdale and Healdsburg Memorial Beach sites, samples were collected over 22 site visits at each site from June 2001 to June 2006. At the site downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant, samples were collected over 5 site visits from October 2004 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (Puckett 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)


DECISION ID	13299	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Ammonia as Nitrogen
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 available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Combined, 0 of the 57 ammonia as nitrogen samples exceed the objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 57 samples exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13299, Ammonia as Nitrogen	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

26333

Pollutant:

Ammonia as Nitrogen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 55 ammonia as nitrogen samples collected from the mainstem Russian River exceed the objective. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): 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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The 1-hour average concentration (acute criterion or CMC) of total ammonia nitrogen (in mg N/L) for freshwater where salmonid fish are present, which is not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average, is calculated using the following equation: CMC=0.275/(1+10^(7.204 - pH)) + 39.0/(1+10^(pH - 7.204)).

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 6 locations as follows: (1) at Comminski Station (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCOMM), (2) at Cloverdale (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCLO1), (3) downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant (SWAMP Station ID 114CLOSTP), (4) at Geyserville (SWAMP Station ID 114RRGEYS), (5) at Alexander Valley Bridge (SWAMP Station ID 114RRALEX), and (6) at Healdsburg Memorial Beach (SWAMP Station ID 114RRHMB1). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

At the Comminski Station, Geyserville, and Alexander Valley Bridge sites, samples were collected over 2 site visits at each site during June 2001. At the Cloverdale and Healdsburg Memorial Beach sites, samples were collected over 22 site visits at each site from June 2001 to June 2006. At the site downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant, samples were collected over 5 site visits from October 2004 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (Puckett 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13299, Ammonia as Nitrogen	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6211

Pollutant:

Ammonia as Nitrogen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 2 total ammonia as nitrogen instantaneous grab samples collected from Foss Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. The sample concentrations range from 0.46 to 1.30 mg/l. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): "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."

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board


DECISION ID	10671	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Arsenic \| Cadmium \| Chromium (total) \| Copper \| Lead \| Mercury \| Nickel \| Selenium \| Silver \| 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 Section 303(d) List under Section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 449 metals samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 449 samples exceeded the metal objectives, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 39 per the binomial distribution described in Section 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, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 10671, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

21544

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

449

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 449 metal samples collected in the mainstem Russian River exceed the objectives. For each of the 10 metal parameters samples, there were 20 samples each collected at the Cloverdale site, 5 samples each collected at the site downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plan, and 19 to 20 samples each collected at the Healdsburg site. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Arsenic objective is 0.05 mg/L. Cadmium objective is 0.01 mg/L. Chromium objective is 0.05 mg/L. Lead objective is 0.05 mg/L. Mercury objective is 0.002 mg/L. Selenium objective is 0.01 mg/L. Silver objective is 0.05 mg/L. Per 22 CCR 64431: Nickel maximum contaminant level is 0.1 mg/L. Per 22 CCR 64449: Copper secondary maximum contaminant level is 1.0 mg/L. Zinc secondary maximum contaminant level is 5.0 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 3 locations as follows: (1) at Cloverdale (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCLO1), (2) downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant (SWAMP Station ID 114CLOSTP), and (3) at Healdsburg Memorial Beach (SWAMP Station ID 114RRHMB1). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

At the Cloverdale and Healdsburg Memorial Beach sites, samples were collected over 22 site visits at each site from June 2001 to June 2006. At the site downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant, samples were collected over 5 site visits from October 2004 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)


DECISION ID	12470	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Chloride
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.2, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 50 chloride samples exceed the evaluation guideline. 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 50 samples exceeded the chloride evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12470, Chloride	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25448

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 50 chloride samples collected in the mainstem Russian River exceed the evaluation guideline. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Waters shall not contain taste- or odor-producing substances in concentrations that impart undesirable tastes or odors to fish flesh or other edible products of aquatic origin, or that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per 22 CCR 64449: The recommended Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for chloride is 250 mg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 6 locations as follows: (1) at Comminski Station (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCOMM), (2) at Cloverdale (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCLO1), (3) at Geyserville (SWAMP Station ID 114RRGEYS), (4) at Alexander Valley Bridge (SWAMP Station ID 114RRALEX), and (5) at Healdsburg Memorial Beach (SWAMP Station ID 114RRHMB1). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)


DECISION ID	12901	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Diazinon
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the 2 diazinon samples exceed the evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective. The weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. Per Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy, a minimum of 5 samples are needed, and only 2 samples are available. This conclusion is also based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) 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, North Coast Regional Water Board 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 attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12901, Diazinon	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6216

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

All 2 of the 2 diazinon samples collected from Foss Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. Concentrations range from 0.133 to 0.707 ug/l. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The 1-hour average maximum concentration criterion for freshwater aquatic life protection is 0.08 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board


DECISION ID	13301	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Nitrate
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. None of the 2 nitrate samples exceed the objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 2 samples exceed the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13301, Nitrate	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6213

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 2 nitrate samples collected from Foss Creek exceed the evaluation guideline. The sample concentrations range from 0.7 to 0.8 mg/l. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The water quality objective for nitrate as nitrogen is 45 mg/l.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board


DECISION ID	12494	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
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. None of the 2,150 polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) samples exceed the evaluation guideline. 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 2,150 samples exceeded the PCB evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 247 per the binomial distribution described in Section 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, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12494, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25473

Pollutant:

PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

2150

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 2,150 polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) analytes collected in the mainstem Russian River exceed the evaluation guideline. Each of the 43 samples were analyzed for 50 PCB cogeners. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007, p. 3-4.00): 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.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the "Public Health Goal for Water Soluble Polychlorinated Biphenyls Expected to Found in Drinking Water" (OEHHA 2007): The health-protective concentration of water-soluble PCBs in
drinking water associated with a one in one million extra lifetime cancer risk is 0.09 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Public Health Goal for Water Soluble Polychlorinated Biphenyls Expected to Be Found in Drinking Water. Pesticide and Environmental Toxicology Branch, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected from the mainstem Russian River at 6 locations as follows: (1) at Cloverdale (SWAMP Station ID 114RRCLO1), (2) downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant (SWAMP Station ID 114CLOSTP), and (3) at Healdsburg Memorial Beach (SWAMP Station ID 114RRHMB1). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)


DECISION ID	12900	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	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. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the 3,797 pesticide samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) Three of the 3,797 samples exceed the pesticide water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 501 per the binomial distribution described in Section 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, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12900, Pesticides	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25640

Pollutant:

Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 39 hexachlorobenzene samples collected in the mainstem Russian River exceeds the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from non-detect (with a reporting limit of 0.001 ug/l) to detected but not quantified with a concentration of at least 0.001 ug/l. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The recommended criterion for hexachlorobenzene for the protection of source waters for human health consumption of water and organisms is 0.00028 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12900, Pesticides	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25638

Pollutant:

Disulfoton

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 41 disulfoton samples collected in the mainstem Russian River exceeds the evaluation guideline. Sample concentrations range from non-detect (with a reporting limit of 0.050 ug/l) to detected but not quantified with a concentration of at least 0.050 ug/l. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per "Water Quality Criteria 1972" (USEPA 1973): The instantaneous maximum water quality criterion for disulfoton for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is 0.05 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12900, Pesticides	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25639

Pollutant:

DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One DDT sample collected in the Geyserville HSA had a detectable level of DDT and the sample exceeds the evaluation guideline. The sample concentration was reported as detected not quantifiable (DNQ), with estimated value of .004 ug/l (method detection limit of 0.0025 ug/l, reporting limit of .005 ug/l). There were also an additional 42 samples from the Geyserville HSA , which were non-detect. However, these non-detect data could not be utilized in this assessment because the detection limit for DDT is above the evaluation guideline. Per the listing policy, when a sample value is less than the quantitation limit, and the quantitation limit is greater than the evaluation guideline, the result shall not be used in the analysis. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP) (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). DDT, DDE, and DDD data from SWAMP Sampling for Years 2001-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board.

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (USEPA 2006): The recommended criterion for DDT for the protection of source waters for human health consumption of water and organisms is 0.00022 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

At the Cloverdale and Healdsburg Memorial Beach sites, samples were collected over 19 site visits at each site from February 2002 to June 2006. At the site downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plant, samples were collected over 5 site visits from October 2004 to June 2005. Most of the site visits corresponded to fall, winter, spring and early summer seasonal conditions.

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)


DECISION ID	4488	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Phosphorus
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)(2006)
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. It is unknown if any of the phosphorus samples exceed the water quality objective as there is insufficient information available to determine exceedance. Specifically, the samples cannot be compared to the objective because diel samples for dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and/or chlorophyll-a are not available. Nutrients such as phosphorus do not impair beneficial uses by themselves, or cause non-attainment of the objective. Rather, they cause indirect impacts through algal growth and extreme diel patterns for DO and pH, which then impair uses. Waterbody-specific factors such as riparian cover, flow conditions, and stream channel configuration also affect how nutrients are processed within the stream and play a large role in determining whether or not nuisance algal conditions will prevail. For these reasons, comparing a single nutrient value to the biostimulatory objective is not recommended. Instead, nutrient-related indicator parameters, such as diel measurements of DO, pH, and/or chlorophyll-a, should be evaluated to determine attainment of the objective and protection of beneficial uses. When nutrient-related indicator parameters exceed targets, nutrient concentrations will then be analyzed to determine whether phosphorus should be added to a possible listing under the 303(d) List. Therefore, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is also 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) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. Note: Lines of evidence for both orthophosphate and total dissolved phosphorus data support this Decision. Total dissolved phosphorus includes orthophosphate. Phosphorus is used as the pollutant for this Decision because it includes both fractions and is easier to understand its relationship to other nutrients and the water quality objective.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board 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 attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4488, Phosphorus	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

1744

Pollutant:

Phosphate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Of the total 8 samples from the three sites values ranged from non-detectable to 0.163 mg/L (Sandler, 2004).

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Basin Plan does not have a water quality objective for orthophosphate.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Evaluation Guideline:

There is no appropriate interpretive evaluation guideline for orthophosphate.

Guideline Reference:

Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)

Spatial Representation:

Sampling was limited to three locations along the Russian River, one at Healdsburg, and two at Cloverdale. Sample site RUS070 is located at the Healdsburg Veteran's beach, Healdsburg. Sample site RUS080 is located at the Cloverdale 1st St. bridge, Cloverdale. Sample site RUS090 is located at the Cloverdale River Park, Cloverdale.

Temporal Representation:

RUS070 was sampled once in April 2003.
RUS080 was sampled once a month April through August 2003.
RUS090 was sampled once in May, once in July and once in August 2003.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Draft QAPP for Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Project for the Community Clean Water Institute.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4488, Phosphorus	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6212

Pollutant:

Phosphorus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

It is unknown whether any of the 2 phosphorus samples collected in Foss Creek exceed the objective as there is insufficient information available to determine exceedance. Specifically, the samples cannot be compared to the objective because diel samples for dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, and/or chlorophyll-a are not available. Nutrients, such as phosphorus, alone do not impair beneficial uses or cause non-attainment of the objective. Rather, they cause indirect impacts through algal growth and extreme diel patterns for DO and pH, which then impair uses. Waterbody-specific factors such as riparian cover, flow conditions, and stream channel configuration also affect how nutrients are processed within the stream and play a large role in determining whether or not nuisance algal conditions will prevail. For these reasons, comparing a single nutrient value to the biostimulatory objective is not recommended. Instead, nutrient-related indicator parameters, such as diel measurements of DO, pH, and/or chlorophyll-a, should be evaluated to determine attainment of the objective and protection of beneficial uses. When nutrient-related indicator parameters exceed targets, nutrient concentrations will then be analyzed to determine whether phosphorus should be added to a possible listing under the 303(d) List. The samples ranged from 0.32 to 0.62 mg/l. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance, or that otherwise adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board


DECISION ID	10570	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Section 303(d) List under Section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Nine of the 57 specific conductivity samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) Nine of the 57 samples exceed the specific conductivity objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 10570, Specific Conductivity	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

21323

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Eight of the 55 specific conductivity grab samples collected from the mainstem Russian River exceed the objective. Samples met the 90% upper limit objective in all years at all sites, but exceeded the 50% upper limit objective at the following stations in the following years: at Cloverdale in 2006, downstream of the Cloverdale Water Treatment Plan in 2005, at Alexander Valley Bridge in 2001, and at Healdsburg Memorial Beach in 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, and 2006. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the SWAMP Summary Report for the North Coast Region for Years 2000-2006 (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The 90% upper limit specific conductance objective at 77 F is 320 micromhos (or mS/cm2). The 50% upper limit specific conductance objective at 77 F is 250 micromhos (or mS/cm2). The 90% and 50% upper limits represent the 90/50 percentile values for a calendar year. 90% or 50% or more of the values must be less than or equal to the upper limit.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (Puckett 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 10570, Specific Conductivity	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6209

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 2 specific conductivity samples collected in Foss Creek exceeds the specific conductivity water quality objective. The sample concentrations range from 147 to 270 uS. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The 90% upper limit specific conductance objective at 77 F is 320 micromhos (or uS/cm2). The 50% upper limit specific conductance objective at 77 F is 250 micromhos (or uS/cm2). The 90% and 50% upper limits represent the 90/50 percentile values of the monthly means for a calendar year. 90% or 50% or more of the values must be less than or equal to the upper limit.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board


DECISION ID	12540	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Sulfates
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.2, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 55 sulfate samples exceed the evaluation guideline. 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 (i.e., sufficient justification to not 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) None of the 55 samples exceed the sulfate evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. (4) Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, North Coast Regional Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the Section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards are being attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 12540, Sulfates	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

25557

Pollutant:

Sulfates

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Not Recorded

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 55 sulfate samples collected in the mainstem Russian River exceed the evaluation guideline. The samples were collected as part of the Surface Water Ambient Water Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The data are found in the 5-Year Monitoring Report (NCRWQCB 2008).

Data Reference:

Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Summary Report for the North Coast Region (RWQCB-1) for years 2000-2006. North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. March 2008

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007, p. 3-3.00): Waters shall not contain taste- or odor-producing substances in concentrations that impart undesirable tastes or odors to fish flesh or other edible products of aquatic origin, or that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Per 22 CCR 64449 (Table 64449-B): The recommended secondary maximum contaminant level for sulfate is 250 mg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Title 22. Division 4. Chapter 15. Sections 64400 et seq. California Code of Regulations

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

There are no known environmental conditions (e.g., seasonality, land use practices, fire events, storms, etc.) that are related to these data.

QAPP Information:

Quality control was conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWAMP 2002).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

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)


DECISION ID	13302	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

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:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Section 303(d) List under Section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information available to determine if it is appropriate to place this water segment-pollutant combination on the Section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. One of the 2 pH samples exceed the water quality objective, and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 5 samples are needed for application of Table 3.2, and only 2 samples are available. This conclusion is also based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) 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, North Coast Regional Water Board 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 attained.

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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 13302, pH	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

6210

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Aquatic Life Use:

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the 2 pH samples collected in Foss Creek exceeds the specific conductivity water quality objective. The sample concentrations range from 6.3 to 3.8 uS. The samples were collected as part of the Russian River First Flush sampling event. Data are summarized by Katznelson et al. (2003).

Data Reference:

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Per the Basin Plan (NCRWQCB 2007): The maximum pH objective is 8.5. The minimum pH objective is 6.5.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - North Coast Region (Region 1)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected from 2 sites in Foss Creek as follows: (1) in Foss Creek in downtown Healdsburg, and (2) in Upper Foss Creek.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected on November 7, 2002. At each site, 3 instantaneous grab samples were collected over half hour increments. The data are averaged for each site.

Environmental Conditions:

Samples were collected during the first runoff event of the rainy season.

QAPP Information:

Samples were collected in accordance with the study plan and quality control procedures described by Katznelson et al. (2003).

QAPP Information Reference(s):

2002 Russian River First Flush Summary Report. Clean Water Team, Citizen Monitoring Program of the State Water Resources Control Board


DECISION ID	5919	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Flow Alteration/Regulation/Modification \| Habitat Modification \| Nonpoint Source \| Removal of Riparian Vegetation
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2019
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	No new data were assessed for 2008. 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.

USEPA Action (if applicable):	USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 5919, Temperature, water	Region 1
Russian River HU, Middle Russian River HA, Geyserville HSA

LOE ID:

4765

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.

Data Reference:

Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Unspecified

QAPP Information Reference(s):