# Draft 2008 California 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report

# Supporting Information

## Regional Board 3 - Central Coast Region

Water Body Name: | Uvas Creek (below Uvas Reservoir)
Water Body ID: | CAR3052002120080603163208
Water Body Type: | River & Stream

DECISION ID | 10945
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized)
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. None of the 17 samples exceed the General water quality objective set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the 17 samples exceed the General water quality objective set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses, 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10945

LOE ID: | 9347
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) .
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 9346
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) .
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10947
Pollutant: | Boron
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10947

LOE ID: | 9401
Pollutant: | Boron
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Boron, dissolved.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3.4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for boron for irrigation supply is 0.75 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/25/2005-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10948
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10948

LOE ID: | 9402
Pollutant: | Chloride
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when chloride exceeds 106 mg/L in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/25/2005-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 12698
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 16 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) and the General Water Quality Objective set to protect aquatic life beneficial uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 16 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) and the General Water Quality Objective set to protect aquatic life beneficial uses and this does not exceed the allowable frequency 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12698

LOE ID: | 9399
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 16
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
| North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards
| Water quality standards table
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards
| North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/19/1998-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 9400
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 16
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
| North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards
| Water quality standards table
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards
| North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 2/19/1998-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 15858
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. One of the 3 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Sipmann and Finlayson, 2000) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 16 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the 3 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Sipmann and Finlayson, 2000) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 15858

LOE ID: | 16190
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 5/3/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16282
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16283
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16191
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 5/3/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 15859
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. None of the 3 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Sipmann and Finlayson, 2000) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 16 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 3 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Sipmann and Finlayson, 2000) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 15859

LOE ID: | 16705
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16855
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 5/3/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16854
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 5/3/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16706
Pollutant: | Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000).
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10953
Pollutant: | Electrical 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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 644 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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. 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 644 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10953

LOE ID: | 13830
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11052
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17509
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 294
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 294 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-10/30/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17852
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 315
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 315 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(uS).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 9 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/31/2004-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10954
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
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
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the 10 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria, 1986) as it applies to the Water Contact Recreation beneficial use or the water quality objective for Non-Contact Recreation. 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 10 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria, 1986) as it applies to the Water Contact Recreation beneficial use or the water quality objective for Non-Contact Recreation, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10954

LOE ID: | 11072
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Evaluation Guideline: | Single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli in freshwater is 235 MPN/100mL (as stated in Table 4, page 15)
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/25/2005-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11073
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. E. coli is a fecal coliform.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/25/2005-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10955
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform
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
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three of the 17 samples exceed the Water Contact Recreation water quality objective and none of the 17 samples exceed the Non-contact Recreation 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 17 samples exceed the Water Contact Recreation water quality objective and none of the 17 samples exceed the Non-Contact Recreation 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10955

LOE ID: | 11035
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 3
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 200 MPN/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN/100 ml.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11051
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10957
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Twenty-two of the 825 samples exceed the Municipal & Domestic Supply water quality objective and sixteen of the 825 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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. 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. Twenty-two of the 825 samples exceed the Municipal & Domestic Supply water quality objective and sixteen of the 825 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality objective. Neither 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10957

LOE ID: | 13712
Pollutant: | Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17925
Pollutant: | Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 790
Number of Exceedances: | 22
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 22 of 790 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-3/20/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13697
Pollutant: | Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17924
Pollutant: | Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 790
Number of Exceedances: | 16
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 16 of 790 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-3/20/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 9348
Pollutant: | Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 9349
Pollutant: | Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
| Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10946
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia)
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. None of the 804 samples exceed the exceed the Evaluation Guideline (EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level, 2006) applied to protect the Municipal & Domestic Supply beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the 804 samples exceed the exceed the Evaluation Guideline (EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level, 2006) applied to protect the Municipal & Domestic Supply beneficial use, 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10946

LOE ID: | 9377
Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 17
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 17 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Health Advisory 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013
Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure."
Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17776
Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 787
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 787 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia As N, Total.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Health Advisory 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013
Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure."
Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-3/20/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10960
Pollutant: | Salinity
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10960

LOE ID: | 11967
Pollutant: | Salinity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Salinity.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when salinity exceeds 3.0 ppt in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/25/2005-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 12983
Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity
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
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant in sediment samples. The single sediment sample was not toxic to test organisms (did not exibit a significant increase in mortality compared to the laboratory control) and therefore did not exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity, set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 16 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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. The single sediment sample was not toxic to test organisms and therefore do not exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity, set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12983

LOE ID: | 24669
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Sediment
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Hyalella azteca Survival (%) 10 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 5/3/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 24668
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Sediment
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 1
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Hyalella azteca Survival (%) 10 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 5/3/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10962
Pollutant: | Sodium
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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 10 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10962

LOE ID: | 9403
Pollutant: | Sodium
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 10
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 10 samples exceed the criterion for Sodium.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when sodium exceeds 69 mg/L in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/25/2005-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10963
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Twelve of the 554 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Moyle 1976) applied to protect the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use. 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 26 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting. 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. Twelve of the 554 samples exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Moyle 1976) applied to protect the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10963

LOE ID: | 17635
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 518
Number of Exceedances: | 12
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 12 of 518 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (General Objective in Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11966
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (General Objective in Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 14095
Pollutant: | Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (General Objective in Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129).
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 12705
Pollutant: | Unknown Toxicity
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
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 and section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant in water samples. None of the samples were toxic to test organisms (exhibited a significant increase in mortality or decrease in cell density compared to the laboratory control) and therefore do not exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity, set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. The following is a summary of the results from individual toxicity tests. Neither of the samples, tested for toxicity to plants (algae species), exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity. In addition, neither of the samples, tested for toxicity to vertebrate test organisms (larval fish), exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity. Lastly, neither of the samples, tested for toxicity to invertebrate test organisms (water fleas or amphipods), exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity. 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. However, there are an insufficient number of samples to make a "use rating" decision. Central Coast Water Board staff require a minimum of 16 samples to make a "use rating" decision of Fully Supporting, only 6 toxicity samples are assessed here. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the samples were toxic to test organisms and therefore do not exceed the narrative General Objective for toxicity, set to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12705

LOE ID: | 24673
Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Pimephales promelas Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 24674
Pollutant: | Plant Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Selenastrum capricornutum Growth (Cell Density) 4 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction in cell count of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and cell count <80% of control.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue].
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 24664
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 24675
Pollutant: | Plant Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Selenastrum capricornutum Growth (Cell Density) 4 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction in cell count of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and cell count <80% of control.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 24665
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 24672
Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 2
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (04SW3001) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Pimephales promelas Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries).
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival.
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2006-5/17/2006. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring).
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10968
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
Weight of Evidence: | 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. Eighteen lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seventy-four of 634 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality objective, 57 of 634 samples exceed the Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitat water quality objective and 90 of 634 samples exceed the numeric objective for Municipal & Domestic Supply, Non-Contact Recreation and Water Contact Recreation. 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. Seventy-four of 634 samples exceed the Agricultural Supply water quality objective, 57 of 634 samples exceed the Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitat water quality objective and 90 of 634 samples exceed the numeric objective for Municipal & Domestic Supply, Non-Contact Recreation and Water Contact Recreation. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10968

LOE ID: | 11071
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11070
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11069
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11055
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11054
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11053
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13838
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13837
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 3
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13836
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 3
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13835
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 3
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13834
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13833
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 2
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17913
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply
Number of Samples: | 598
Number of Exceedances: | 72
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 72 of 598 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17930
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 598
Number of Exceedances: | 56
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 56 of 598 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17929
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 598
Number of Exceedances: | 85
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 85 of 598 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17928
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples: | 598
Number of Exceedances: | 85
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 85 of 598 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17926
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 598
Number of Exceedances: | 56
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 56 of 598 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17927
Pollutant: | pH
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples: | 598
Number of Exceedances: | 85
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 85 of 598 samples exceed the criterion for pH.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 10 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn, at 101]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 10958
Pollutant: | Low Dissolved Oxygen
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture | Other Urban Runoff
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.1 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two water quality objectives are assessed: Thirty-three of the 87 samples exceed the dissolved oxygen water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat and 6 of the 87 samples also exceed the dissolved oxygen water quality objective for Warm Freshwater Habitat.. In addition, one of 18 samples exceed the general water quality objective for oxygen saturation (when applied as a single sample maximum). However, the Basin Plan objective states that the median oxygen saturation value shall not fall below 85% and the median value did not exceed this criterion. Therefore, the use rating for oxygen saturation is set at insufficient information. Based on section 3.2 the site exceeded numeric objectives for conventional pollutants. According to the binomial distribution, waters shall be placed on the section 303(d) list if the number of measured exceedances supports rejection of the null hypothesis as presented in Table 3.2. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Thirty-three of the 87 samples exceed the dissolved oxygen water quality objective for Cold Freshwater Habitat and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 10958

LOE ID: | 17780
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 68
Number of Exceedances: | 6
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 68 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. A total of 281 measurements were recorded, and of those 6 were below 5.0 mg/L. However multiple measurements were taken on a given day and for those, the lowest value was used for each day.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-101 - Uvas Creek at Highway 101.
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 16911
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 68
Number of Exceedances: | 33
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 33 of 68 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. A total of 281 measurements were recorded, and of those 78 were below 7.0 mg/L. However multiple measurements were taken on a given day and for those, the lowest value was used for each day.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Cold Water Habitat Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-101 - Uvas Creek at Highway 101.
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 10/1/2002-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 12004
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 12003
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 19
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 12002
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | Dissolved
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 19
Number of Exceedances: | 0
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Cold Water Habitat Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 12005
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 1
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation.
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: |
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID | 12699
Pollutant: | Turbidity
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision
Revision Status | Revised
Sources: | Agriculture | Other Urban Runoff | Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant
Weight of Evidence: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.1 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.2 the site exceeded numeric objectives for conventional pollutants. According to the binomial distribution, waters shall be placed on the section 303(d) list if the number of measured exceedances supports rejection of the null hypothesis as presented in Table 3.2. In addition, A recent publication (Steelhead/Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Resources South of the Golden Gate, California (Becker, G.S and I.J Reining, October 2008) identifies Uvas Creek as having "Definite run or population". Therefore this temperature guideline is relevant to the waterbody. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Eighty-one of 181 samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline (Sigler et al., 1984) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
USEPA Decision: |

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 12699

LOE ID: | 11964
Pollutant: | Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 12
Number of Exceedances: | 4
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 12 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13684
Pollutant: | Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 11
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 11 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 13683
Pollutant: | Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 18
Number of Exceedances: | 11
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Central Coast Watershed Studies (R3_CCOWS) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 11 of 18 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCoWS (Central Coast Watershed Studies) Water Quality Data
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Luchessa]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/28/2003-3/1/2004.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good and Standard Operating Procedures are well documented in QAPP. However, data documentation is poor and replicate samples and other quality assurance measurements are not consistently documented in this data set.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 11965
Pollutant: | Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 12
Number of Exceedances: | 4
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Pajaro (Pajaro) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 12 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2
| Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 305UVA-Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Avenue]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 12/18/1997-3/15/2006. Pajaro watershed is one of five annual rotation areas that are monitored for conventional pollutants by CCAMP staff monthly for one year.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17449
Pollutant: | Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 151
Number of Exceedances: | 66
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 66 of 151 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 9 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 9/28/2005-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID: | 17450
Pollutant: | Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water
Matrix: | Water
Fraction: | None
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples: | 151
Number of Exceedances: | 66
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed Monterey Area Research Consortium (R3_MARC) data for Uvas Creek(below res) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 66 of 151 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU).
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file A
| Final Data File used for assessment: Marc Los Huertos Water Quality Data, file B
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries.
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Central Coast Region (R3) Basin Plan
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food.
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Uvas Creek(below res) was collected at 9 monitoring sites [ UV-THO - Uvas Creek at Thomas Rd., UV-URB - Uvas Creek below Uvas Reservoir, UV-152 - Uvas Creek at Highway 152, UV-BLO - Uvas Creek at Bloomfield Av. Bridge, UV-H25 - Uvas Creek at Highway 25, CA-H25- Uvas Creek at Highway 25, Bonfante Garden Outlet, UV-UCP - Uvas Creek at Canyon County Park, Above Barn]
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 9/28/2005-2/11/2007.
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: | Regional Board approved QAPP. Multiple errors were identified in data and were flagged or fixed by RB staff (in communication with Project staff) prior to assessment of data.
QAPP Information Reference(s):