| |
DECISION ID |
16282 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Antimony | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Lead | Phenanthrene | Pyrene | Zinc |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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.
One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the samples exceed the water quality objective.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.
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. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the suggested values in the Sediment Quality Guidelines and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| |
| 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: |
|
| |
| |
| |
| LOE ID: |
27917 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Antimony | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Lead | Phenanthrene | Pyrene | Zinc |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Sediment |
| Matrix: |
Sediment |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Estuarine Habitat |
| Aquatic Life Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat | Marine Habitat | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
3 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Chemical monitoring of sediments |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
The data used was from the Southern CA Bight 2003 Regional Monitoring Program (Volume II, Sediment Chemistry).
Zero of three samples for each pollutant exceeded the Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQGs) in marine and estuarine sediment. |
| Data Reference: |
Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey Data |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The Region 4 Basin Plan Objective for chemical constituents states: "Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use." |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan |
| |
Basin Plan Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan as of 02/02/2009 |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
The Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQGs) for Effects-Range Median (Long et al., 1995) are 25 ug/g for Antimony, 70 ug/g for Arsenic, 270 ug/g for Copper, and 260 ng/g for Dibenz[a,h]anthracene, and 410 ug/g for zinc (all dry weight). The Sediment Quality Guidelines (SQGs) for Probable Effects Level (MacDonald et al., 1996) are 763.22 ng/g for Benzo(a)pyrene, 692.53 ng/g for Benzo(a)anthracene, 845.98 ng/g for Chrysene, 112.18 ug/g for Lead, 543.53 ng/g for Phenanthrene, and 1,397.4 ng/g for Pyrene (all dry weight). |
| Guideline Reference: |
Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 |
| |
Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Three monitoring stations at Malibu Lagoon: 4683 (Lat 34.03279, Long -118.68481), 4939 (Lat 34.032583, Long -118.681383), and 5739 (Lat 34.03435, Long -118.68198). |
| Temporal Representation: |
The sediment samples were taken on 8/20/2003 and 10/2/2003 as part of the Bight 03 Monitoring Project. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
The work was performed in accordance with the provisions of the Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey (Bight03) Quality Assurance Manual |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey (Bight 03) Quality Assurance Manual |
| |
DECISION ID |
16266 |
| |
| 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 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the samples exceed the water quality objective.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.
This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of three samples exceeded the exhibit significant toxicity to Eohaustorius estuarius. 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 16266 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
27830 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Sediment Toxicity |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Toxicity |
| Matrix: |
Sediment |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Estuarine Habitat |
| Aquatic Life Use: |
Cold Freshwater Habitat | Marine Habitat | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Warm Freshwater Habitat | Wildlife Habitat |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
3 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Toxicity testing of sediments |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
A total of zero of three samples exhibited significant toxicity to, the amphipod, Eohaustorius estuarius. |
| Data Reference: |
Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey Data |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan |
| |
Basin Plan Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan as of 02/02/2009 |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
Toxicity was defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing (parametric Dunnett's Test or non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon Two-sample Test). |
| Guideline Reference: |
Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Three monitoring stations were monitored in Malibu Lagoon as part of the Bight 03 Monitoring Project:
4197 (Lat 34.03276, Long -118.68222)
4683 (Lat 34.03279, Long -118.68481), and
5739 (Lat 34.03435, Long -118.68198). |
| Temporal Representation: |
Sediment samples were taken on 08/20/2003 for sample station 4197 and on 10/02/2003 for sample stations 4683 and 5739 as part of the Bight 03 Monitoring Project. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
The work was performed in accordance with the provisions of the Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey (Bight03) Quality Assurance Manual. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey (Bight 03) Quality Assurance Manual |
| |
DECISION ID |
7252 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Eutrophic |
| Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Sources: |
Agriculture-animal | Atmospheric Deposition | Golf course activities | Groundwater Loadings | Irrigated Crop Production | Major Municipal Point Source-dry and/or wet weather discharge | Onsite Wastewater Systems (Septic Tanks) | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| TMDL Name: |
Malibu Creek Nutrients |
| TMDL Project Code: |
239 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: |
03/21/2003 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under 2.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been established by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. |
| |
| 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 Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because a TMDL has been established by USEPA, and 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 7252 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
4330 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Eutrophic |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Estuarine Habitat |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
| Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
| Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
| Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
| QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
| |
| LOE ID: |
28459 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Eutrophic |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Narrative Description Data |
| Matrix: |
Not Specified |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Estuarine Habitat |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
A TMDL has been established for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Malibu Creek Watershed Nutrient TMDL was established by USEPA on March 21, 2003. |
| Data Reference: |
Staff report, appendix, and letter to SWRCB and Los Angeles RWQCB establishing a TMDL for Nutrients in the Malibu Creek Watershed. |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
|
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
|
| Temporal Representation: |
|
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
QA information unavailable. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
7278 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Swimming Restrictions |
| Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Sources: |
Agriculture-animal | Illicit Connections/Illegal Hook-ups/Dry Weather Flows | Natural Sources | Onsite Wastewater Systems (Septic Tanks) | Spills | Surface Runoff | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| TMDL Name: |
Malibu Pathogens |
| TMDL Project Code: |
236 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: |
01/10/2006 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under 2.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. |
| |
| 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 Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because a TMDL has been approved by USEPA, and 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 7278 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
28091 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Swimming Restrictions |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Narrative Description Data |
| Matrix: |
Not Specified |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
A TMDL has been approved for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Malibu Creek Bacteria TMDL was adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB on December 13, 2004 and subsequently approved by USEPA. The TMDL was been integrated into the Basin Plan as Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2004-019R. |
| Data Reference: |
Basin Plan Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan as of 02/02/2009 |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
|
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
|
| Temporal Representation: |
|
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
QA information unavailable. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
| |
| LOE ID: |
4332 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Swimming Restrictions |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Health Advisories |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
|
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
| Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
| Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
| QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
7281 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Viruses (enteric) |
| Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Sources: |
Agriculture-animal | Illicit Connections/Illegal Hook-ups/Dry Weather Flows | Natural Sources | Onsite Wastewater Systems (Septic Tanks) | Spills | Surface Runoff | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| TMDL Name: |
Malibu Pathogens |
| TMDL Project Code: |
236 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: |
01/10/2006 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under 2.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. |
| |
| 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 Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because a TMDL has been approved by USEPA, and 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 7281 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
4333 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Viruses (enteric) |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
Unspecified |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
Unspecified |
| Guideline Reference: |
Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Unspecified |
| Temporal Representation: |
Unspecified |
| Environmental Conditions: |
Unspecified |
| QAPP Information: |
Unspecified |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
| |
| LOE ID: |
28093 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Viruses (enteric) |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Narrative Description Data |
| Matrix: |
Not Specified |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Not Specified |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
A TMDL has been approved for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Malibu Creek Bacteria TMDL was adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB on December 13, 2004 and subsequently approved by USEPA. The TMDL was been integrated into the Basin Plan as Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2004-019R. |
| Data Reference: |
Basin Plan Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan as of 02/02/2009 |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
|
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
|
| Temporal Representation: |
|
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
QA information unavailable. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
7251 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Benthic Community Effects |
| Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (being addressed by action other than TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Sources: |
Hydromodification |
| Expected Attainment Date: |
2011 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: |
The Malibu Lagoon experiences; a lack of surface water movement and ineffective tidal movement in open conditions; excessive sedimentation of fine grain particles and gradual sedimentation throughout the western lagoon; excessive buildup of nitrogen and phosphorus and limited denitrification; eutrophication during dry-weather and depressed oxygen levels; and habitat disturbance and modification and contains invasive species.
The Restoration Feasibility Study proposes to address these deficiencies through various alternatives with differing degrees of success. These alternatives propose utilizing existing wind and hydraulic gradients mechanism; lowering the channel beds and reconfiguring the hydraulic system; reducing direct exposure to creek flows, increase flushing and expulsion of sediment under open hydraulic conditions, and managing the overall sedimentation rate; modifying the lagoon's three dimensional geometry, lowering the lagoon surface water area to bed sediment area ratio; increasing scour of fines and summer organic matter and increased mixing of lagoon waters to create conditions with higher oxygen levels in the water and sediment; and altering the lagoon topography to enhance drainage and modifying habitat to attractive for increase avian usage. |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.9 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list (being addressed by actions other than TMDL section).
This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
The Malibu Lagoon Restoration Feasibility Study Final Alternatives Analysis describes restoration measure for Malibu Lagoon. These proposed restoration efforts, if fully implemented, is anticipated to correct the conditions which allow the negative indicator species to thrive. |
| |
| 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 303(d) list (being addressed by actions other than TMDL) because the proposed restoration measures are expected to affect existing conditions such that negative indicator species will cease to thrive. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
|
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7251 |