| |
DECISION ID |
16499 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Benthic Community Effects |
| 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: |
Pollution |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
Benthic Community Effects is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.9 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating the Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. 2 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this water segment 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. 2 of 2 samples exceeded the Index of Biological Integrity (IBI) value of "poor" water quality for this area and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 5 samples is needed for application of Table 3.2. 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: |
|
| |
| |
| |
| LOE ID: |
26403 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Benthic Community Effects |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Adverse Biological Responses |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
2 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Two samples of IBI data were taken on November 2000 and May 2003 at one sampling site. Of the total number of samples, all two of the samples exceeded the IBI impairment threshold. |
| Data Reference: |
Fish and Game IBI Data |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the San Diego Basin Plan the objective is: 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. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board. (SDRWQCB, 1995) |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9). |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
The Index of Biological Integrity (IBI) is an analytical tool that can be used to assess the biological and physical condition of streams and rivers within a zero to one hundred scoring range: Very Poor 0-19, Poor 20-39, Fair 40-59, Good 60- 79, Very Good 80-100. The IBI score of 39 was set as an impairment threshold because it is a statistical criterion of two standard deviations below the mean reference site score which defines the boundary between 'fair' and 'poor' IBI creek conditions. (Ode, p. 9) |
| Guideline Reference: |
"A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams". Environmental Management. Volume 35, number 1 (2005): 1-13.
|
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at one site: 905KCCSDx on Kit Carson Creek. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Sampling occurred during one event on November 2000 and May 2003. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Quality Control for collection and identification was conducted in accordance with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the California Stream Bioassessment Procedure and the State of California, California Monitoring an Assessment Program: "CMAP", Quality Assurance Project Plan. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
State of California, California Monitoring and Assessment Program: "CMAP". |
| |
Quality Assurance Project Plan for the California Stream Bioassessment Procedure |
| |
The San Diego Stream Team Quality Assurance Project Plan |
| |
DECISION ID |
4772 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Total Dissolved Solids |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| Sources: |
Agricultural Return Flows | Flow Regulation/Modification | Unknown Nonpoint Source | Unknown Point Source | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A large number of samples exceed the water quality objective, but the number of samples is insufficient to determine compliance with the confidence and power required by the Policy,
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. Ten of 11 samples exceeded the 500 mg/L TDS for inland surface waters Basin Plan water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| |
| RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4772 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3252 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Total Dissolved Solids |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total Dissolved |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
11 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
10 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the City of San Diego Water Dept. from 1999-2000. Ten of the 11 samples were in exceedance. |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan: For inland surface waters and all beneficial uses, the WQO for TDS is 500 mg/L. This concentration is not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time during any one year period. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek at Sunset Drive. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected in April-June 1999 and February-April 2000. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Data used in 2002 assessment. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
4683 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollution |
| |
| Weight of Evidence: |
This condition is being considered for listing under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 a minimum of two lines of evidence are needed to assess listing status.
Only one line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.9, there is an inadequate amount of data to determine if any pollutant causes or contributes to the benthic effects.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not 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. Pollutant data is not available.
2. The data used may not satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
3. The data used may not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the 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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The Regional Board will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if water quality standards have been exceeded. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4683 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3255 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Population/Community Degradation |
| Matrix: |
Not Specified |
| Fraction: |
None |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
0 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the Stream Team in 2000 and 2001. Taxa Richness increased from Fall to Spring from 3.7 to 7.0. EPT index increased from 1.1 to 11.2. Tolerance value decreased from 6.7 to 5.8. For both seasons, the dominant feeding group was collectors. (Stream Team, 2001). |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
No objective. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek. Exact location was not reported. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected in Fall 2000 and Spring 2001. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
QA Info Missing |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
4760 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Picloram |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None 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 does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. QAQC information was not available
3. None of the two samples exceeded the 0.5 mg/L MCL for Picloram water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
3. 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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not exceeded. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4760 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3250 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Picloram |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
2 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the City of San Diego Water Dept. in 2000. None of the 2 samples were in exceedance. (SWRCB, 2003). |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan: For inland surface waters with a municipal beneficial use, the WQO for Picloram is 0.5 mg/L. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek at Sunset Drive. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected once each on 02/22/2000 and 04/18/2000. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Data used in 2002 assessment. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
4686 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Simazine |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A single sample was taken and it did not exceed the water quality objective.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient 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:
4. The data satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
5. The data satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Only one sample exceeded the 0.004 mg/L MCL simazine criteria for inland surface water and domestic use. More data is needed to determine if the water quality objective is exceeded.
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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are exceeded. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4686 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3251 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Simazine |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
1 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the City of San Diego Water Dept. in 2000. One sample was collected and was not in exceedance. (SWRCB, 2003). |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan: For inland surface waters with a municipal beneficial use, the WQO for Simazine is 0.004 mg/L. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek at Sunset Drive. |
| Temporal Representation: |
One sample was collected on 03/21/2000. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Data used in 2002 assessment. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
4771 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. There is not numerical guideline available to determine if water quality objective has been exceeded.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient 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 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. Only two samples were collected but an adquate guideline is not available to determine the allowable exceedance frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
3.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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if water quality standards have been exceeded. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4771 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3253 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Total Suspended Solids (TSS) |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
2 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the City of San Diego Water Dept. in 1999. Two samples were collected. Their TSS concentrations ranged from 2.5-3.3 mg/L. (SWRCB, 2003). |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan: For inland surface waters and all beneficial uses, waters shall not contain suspended and settleable solids in concentrations of solids that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek at Sunset Drive. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected once each on 04/26/1999 and 05/24/1999. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Data used in 2002 assessment. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
4757 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Turbidity |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the 3 samples exceeded the 5 NTU for inland turbidity water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. However, a less than 5 samples were collected, which is below the required number of sample size.
3.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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not exceeded. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4757 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3254 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Turbidity |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
3 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the City of San Diego Water Dept. in 1999. None of the 3 samples were in exceedance. (SWRCB. 2003). |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan: For inland surface waters with a municipal beneficial use, the WQO for Turbidity is 5 ntu. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek at Sunset Drive. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected once each in 04/1999, 05/1999, and 06/1999. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Data used in 2002 assessment. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
| |
DECISION ID |
4761 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Pentachlorophenol (PCP) |
| Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
| Revision Status |
Original |
| Sources: |
Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: |
2019 |
| 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. An adequate number of samples exceed the water quality objective.
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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Two of 2 samples exceeded the 0.001 mg/L MCL for pentachlorophenol in inland surface waters, water quality objective and this exceeds 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: |
No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. |
| |
| SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: |
After review of the available data and information, SWRCB 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. |
| |
| USEPA Decision: |
|
| |
| |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 4761 |
| |
| LOE ID: |
3249 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Pentachlorophenol (PCP) |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
2 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Data were collected by the City of San Diego Water Dept. in 2000. Two of 2 samples were in exceedance. |
| Data Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan: For inland surface waters with a municipal beneficial use, the WQO for pentachlorophenol is 0.001 mg/L. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Kit Carson Creek at Sunset Dr. |
| Temporal Representation: |
Samples were collected once each on 02/22/2000 and 03/06/2000. |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Data used in 2002 assessment. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |