Final California 2012 Integrated Report( 303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 1 - North Coast Region

Water Body Name:	Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River
Water Body ID:	CAR1100002020140113045888
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	32312	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	Flow Alteration/Regulation/Modification \| Removal of Riparian Vegetation
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2014
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47458 is an exact copy of the original 2010 placeholder LOE 3667. LOEs 47451, 47452, 47446, 47448, 47454, 47455, and 47447 are new for the current Integrated Report cycle. This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.11 of the Listing Policy. Under this section when all other delisting factors do not result in the delisting of a water segment but information indicates attainment of standards, a water segment shall be evaluated to determine whether the weight of evidence demonstrates that the water quality standard is attained. If the weight of evidence indicates attainment, the water segment shall be removed from the section 303(d) list. Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) Six of six years of suspended sediment concentrations in the North Fork Elk River (LOE 47451) and South Fork Elk River (LOE 47452) had severity of ill effects index values that exceed the evaluation guideline. (3) Cross sections in the mainstem Elk River (LOE 47448), North Fork Elk River (LOE 47446), and South Fork Elk River (LOE 47454) reflect aggradation of the mean bed level during the period from 2001- 2008. (4) 303(d) listing determinations made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. LOE 47458 is a placeholder for the 303(d) listing data and information from a previous assessment cycle that was initially utilized to make this listing determination. (5) This process is scientifically defensible and reproducible.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47446

Pollutant:

Sedimentation/Siltation

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:

Cross-section data reflect aggradation at most monitoring locations on the North Fork Elk River between 2001 and 2008, with very little scour occurring in a few locations on the river. While each individual cross-section reflects either aggradation or degradation, the reach average change reflects aggradation of the mean bed elevation of the North Fork by 0.53 ft during the period from 2001-2008. The data also reflect that cumulative active channel cross-sectional area was reduced by 29.3 square feet due to sediment deposition during the period from 2001-2008. Ongoing deposition of sediment contributes to nuisance flooding due to reduced channel capacity and the fine sediment filling the channel (primarily silt and very fine sand) impairs cold water fishery use of the stream, particularly spawning, incubation, and emergence. Beneficial uses, aside from MUN, affected by stream aggradation include COLD and FLD.

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, North Coast Region (NCRWQCB 2011): Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in deposition of material that causes nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected in the North Fork Elk River at nine cross-sections in two reaches from North Fork Elk River at Kristi Wrigley's house at site KRW (approximately 1 mile upstream of the confluence with the South Fork) to the confluence with the South Fork Elk River.

Temporal Representation:

Cross-section data were collected from various sites during 2001, 2002, 2004, & 2006-2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document was submitted deailing the protocol for monitoring cross-sections.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47452

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six of 6 years of suspended sediment concentration data at site SFM on the South Fork Elk River had SEV index values that exceed the evaluation guideline. When assessing chronic exposure, maximum SEV index values over the six years range from 10.7 to 12.6, which equates to at least 20 mg/L of suspended sediment concentrations for at least 252 continuous hours of exposure. When assessing acute exposure, maximum SEV index values over the six years range from 7.6 to 10.0, which equates to at least 1,097 mg/L of suspended sediment concentrations for at least 40 continuous hours of exposure.

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Review of 2012 Integrated Report Data as Submitted by Salmon Forever For Elk River and Freshwater Creek. Memo from Adona White to Katharine Carter, Regional Water Board staff. April 3, 2013. 17pp.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, North Coast Region (NCRWQCB 2011): 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. Also, Waters shall not contain suspended material in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

The effects of suspended sediment on beneficial uses associated with the cold water fishery is estimated by the Severity of Ill Effects (SEV) Index for salmonid eggs and larvae life stages, which is a dose-response value calculated by assessing the concentration of suspended sediment and the number of continuous hours that concentration is present (Newcombe and Jensen 1996). Regional Water Board staff determined that a SEV index value of 4 (which equates to a short-term reduction in feeding rates and/or feeding success) or greater represents significant harm to salmonids so as to be detrimental to the beneficial uses associated with the cold water fishery (NCRWQCB 2006).

Guideline Reference:

Channel Suspended Sediment and Fisheries : A Synthesis For Quantitative Assessment of Risk and Impact

Desired Salmonid Freshwater Habitat Conditions for Sediment-Related Indices. State of California North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected in the South Fork Elk River at site SFM.

Temporal Representation:

Continuous SSC data were collected from 2003-2008, and SEVs were calculated for the winter season from December 1 to April 30.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A suspended sediment and turbidity monitoring QAPP was submitted along with standard operating procedures.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47451

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Six of 6 years of suspended sediment concentration data at site KRW on the North Fork Elk River had SEV index values that exceed the evaluation guideline. When assessing chronic exposure, maximum SEV index values over the six years range from 11.2 to 12.5, which equates to at least 20 mg/L of suspended sediment concentrations for at least 252 continuous hours of exposure. When assessing acute exposure, maximum SEV index values over the six years range from 6.7 to 9.1, which equates to at least 1,097 mg/L of suspended sediment concentrations for at least 40 continuous hours of exposure.

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Review of 2012 Integrated Report Data as Submitted by Salmon Forever For Elk River and Freshwater Creek. Memo from Adona White to Katharine Carter, Regional Water Board staff. April 3, 2013. 17pp.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Channel Suspended Sediment and Fisheries : A Synthesis For Quantitative Assessment of Risk and Impact

Desired Salmonid Freshwater Habitat Conditions for Sediment-Related Indices. State of California North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected in the North Fork Elk River at site KRW.

Temporal Representation:

Continuous SSC data were collected from 2003-2008, and SEVs were calculated for the winter season from December 1 to April 30.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A suspended sediment and turbidity monitoring QAPP was submitted along with standard operating procedures.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47448

Pollutant:

Sedimentation/Siltation

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:

Cross-section data reflect aggradation at most monitoring locations on the mainstem Elk River between 2001 and 2007, with very little scour occurring at one monitoring location. While each individual cross-section reflects either aggradation or degradation, the reach average change reflects aggradation of the mean bed elevation of the mainstem Elk River by 0.14 ft during the period from 2001-2007. The data also reflect that cumulative active channel cross-sectional area was reduced by 14.3 square feet due to sediment deposition during the period from 2001-2007. Ongoing deposition of sediment contributes to nuisance flooding due to reduced channel capacity and the fine sediment filling the channel (primarily silt and very fine sand) impairs cold water fishery use of the stream, particularly spawning, incubation, and emergence. Beneficial uses, aside from MUN, affected by stream aggradation include COLD and FLD.

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected in the mainstem Elk River at four cross-sections in two reaches from below the confluence with the North Fork and South Fork Elk Rivers to approximately 1.5 miles below the confluence of the North and South Fork Elk Rivers.

Temporal Representation:

Cross-section data were collected at various sites from 2001, 2002, 2004, 2006, & 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document was submitted deailing the protocol for monitoring cross-sections.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47447

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

At the present time, natural background turbidity levels have not been determined for this watershed, and exceedence probabilities (the turbidity, associated with flow, that is exceeded X% of the time) have not been calculated. Thus, there is currently no appropriate evaluation guideline for this watershed, and no way to determine whether the objective is being exceeded. Once the Elk River Sediment TMDL is final, it will provide information about what turbidity levels constitute background for the Elk River watershed. Additionally, the turbidity data from Salmon Forever will be incorporated into the Elk River Sediment TMDL, and findings from the TMDL can be utilized for the assessment of potential turbidity impairments.

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, North Coast Region (NCRWQCB 2011): Turbidity shall not be increased more than 20 percent above naturally occurring background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected in at the site: North Fork Elk River at Kristi Wrigley's house (KRW).

Temporal Representation:

Near-continuous turbidity data were collected from 2003-2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A suspended sediment and turbidity monitoring QAPP was submitted along with standard operating procedures.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47455

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:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, North Coast Region (NCRWQCB 2011): Turbidity shall not be increased more than 20 percent above naturally occurring background levels.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected at the site: South Fork Elk River at Jessie Noell's house (SFM).

Temporal Representation:

Near-continuous turbidity data were collected from 2003-2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A suspended sediment and turbidity monitoring QAPP was submitted along with standard operating procedures.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47458

Pollutant:

Sedimentation/Siltation

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Not Specified

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:

Unknown

Temporal Representation:

Unknown

Environmental Conditions:

Unknown

QAPP Information:

Unknown

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32312, Sedimentation/Siltation	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47454

Pollutant:

Sedimentation/Siltation

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:

Cross-section data reflect aggradation at most monitoring locations on the South Fork Elk River between 2001 and 2008, with very little scour occurring in a few locations on the river. While each individual cross-section reflects either aggradation or degradation, the reach average change reflects aggradation of the mean bed elevation of the South Fork by 0.49 ft during the period from 2001-2008. The data also reflect that cumulative active channel cross-sectional area was reduced by 27.8 square feet due to sediment deposition during the period from 2001-2008. Ongoing deposition of sediment contributes to nuisance flooding due to reduced channel capacity and the fine sediment filling the channel (primarily silt and very fine sand) impairs cold water fishery use of the stream, particularly spawning, incubation, and emergence. Beneficial uses, aside from MUN, affected by stream aggradation include COLD and FLD.

Data Reference:

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data were collected in the South Fork Elk River at nine cross-sections in two reachs from South Fork Elk River at Jesse Noell's house at site SFM (approximately 0.5 miles upstream of the confluence with the North Fork) to the confluence with the North Fork Elk River.

Temporal Representation:

Cross-section data were collected at various sites from 2001, 2002, 2004-2008.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

A Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) document was submitted deailing the protocol for monitoring cross-sections.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Salmon Forever Sediment Data Package For: 2012 California Integrated Report - Surface Water Quality Assessment and List of Impaired Waters [Clean Water Act Sections 305(b) and 303(d)].


DECISION ID	32316	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47462 is an exact copy of the original 2010 LOE 25369. There are no new data for this water segment-pollutant combination for the current Integrated Report cycle. Regional Water Board conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 14 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) None of the 14 samples exceeded the aluminum 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:	No new data were assessed for this assessment cycle. The conclusion reached in the previous cycle remains the same. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available in a future assessment cycle.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32316, Aluminum	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47462

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:

None of the 14 aluminum samples collected from Elk 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): 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 Elk River Watershed at 3 locations as follows: (1) the North Fork Elk River (SWAMP Station ID 110ELKNFK), (2) South Fork Elk River (SWAMP Station ID 110ELKSFK), and (3) Elk River at Fields Landing (SWAMP Station ID 110ELKRIV). Samples were collected from well-mixed flows in glides or riffles.

Temporal Representation:

At the North Fork site, samples were collected from March 2002 to June 2002. At the South Fork and Fields Landing sites, samples were collected from February 2002 to June 2002. 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	32317	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47463 is an exact copy of the original 2010 LOE 26307. There are no new data for this water segment-pollutant combination for the current Integrated Report cycle. Regional Water Board conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 14 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 14 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:	No new data were assessed for this assessment cycle. The conclusion reached in the previous cycle remains the same. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available in a future assessment cycle.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32317, Ammonia as Nitrogen	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47463

Pollutant:

Ammonia as Nitrogen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 14 ammonia as nitrogen samples collected from the Elk 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:

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)


DECISION ID	32310	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47456 is an exact copy of the original 2010 LOE 21519. There are no new data for this water segment-pollutant combination for the current Integrated Report cycle. Regional Water Board conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 140 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 140 samples exceeded the metal objectives, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency of 12 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:	No new data were assessed for this assessment cycle. The conclusion reached in the previous cycle remains the same. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available in a future assessment cycle.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32310, Multiple Pollutants	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47456

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

140

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 140 metal samples collected in the Elk River exceed the objectives. For each of the 10 metal parameters, there were 4 samples of each collected at the North Fork site, 5 samples each collected at the South Fork site, and 5 samples each collected at the Fields Landing 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:

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	32315	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47461 is an exact copy of the original 2010 LOE 25423. There are no new data for this water segment-pollutant combination for the current Integrated Report cycle. Regional Water Board conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 14 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 14 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:	No new data were assessed for this assessment cycle. The conclusion reached in the previous cycle remains the same. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available in a future assessment cycle.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32315, Chloride	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47461

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 14 chloride samples collected in the Elk 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:

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	32334	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47449 is new for the current Integrated Report cycle. Fecal indicator bacteria (which includes E. coli) are being considered for placement on the Section 303(d) list under Section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence (LOE) is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence for fecal coliform is available in the administrative record to assess fecal indicator bacteria in the upper mainstem Elk River. In accordance with Section 3.3 of the Listing Policy, a 4% exceedance rate shall be used to add waters to the List "if water quality monitoring was conducted April 1 through October 31 only". Data collected from the upper mainstem Elk River were collected within the April 1 through October 31 range, and therefore are assessed under Section 3.3 of the Listing Policy at a 4% exceedance rate. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing the upper mainstem Elk River on the Section 303(d) list for Indicator Bacteria (i.e., sufficient justification to not list). This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: (1) The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of Section 6.1.4 of the Policy. (2) The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of Section 6.1.5 of the Policy. (3) One of 2 E. coli samples from the upper mainstem Elk River exceeded the evaluation guideline 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 either (a) 22 samples, or (b) greater than or equal 3 exceedances of the evaluation guideline with less than 22 samples is needed for application of the 4% exceedance rate under Section 3.3 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32334, Indicator Bacteria	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47449

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Not Specified

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of the two samples exceeded the E. coli evaluation guideline.

Data Reference:

Data for bacteria in various North Coast Region water bodies

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Water Quality Control Plan, North Coast Region (NCRWQCB 2011): 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) for the North Coast Region

Evaluation Guideline:

Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches (CDPH 2011): Beach posting is recommended when single sample E. coli levels exceed 235 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:

The samples were collected at Elk River at Wrigley Road.

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected September and October 2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The samples were collected under the Redwood Community Action Agency's Humboldt Bay First Flush Quality Assurance Project Plan.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	32318	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47464 is an exact copy of the original 2010 LOE 21235. There are no new data for this water segment-pollutant combination for the current Integrated Report cycle. Regional Water Board conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 14 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) None of the 14 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:	No new data were assessed for this assessment cycle. The conclusion reached in the previous cycle remains the same. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available in a future assessment cycle.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32318, Specific Conductivity	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47464

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:

None of the 14 specific conductivity grab samples collected from the Elk River Watershed 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 22 CCR 64449: The recommended secondary Maximum Content Level (MCL) is 900 uS/cm.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

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

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)


DECISION ID	32314	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

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:	The "Eureka Plain HU, Elk River" water body has been split into three water bodies for the current Integrated Report cycle: (1) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Lower Elk River and Martin Slough, (2) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River, and (3) Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Little South Fork Elk River. LOE 47460 is an exact copy of the original 2010 LOE 25532. There are no new data for this water segment-pollutant combination for the current Integrated Report cycle. Regional Water Board conclusion: This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) List in a previous Integrated Report cycle. No new information was reviewed for this current Integrated Report cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: 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 14 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 14 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:	No new data were assessed for this assessment cycle. The conclusion reached in the previous cycle remains the same. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available in a future assessment cycle.

State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 32314, Sulfates	Region 1
Eureka Plain HU, Elk River Watershed, Upper Elk River

LOE ID:

47460

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 14 sulfate samples collected in the Elk 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)