Evaluation Guideline: |
A desired goal in order to prevent plant nuisance in streams and other flowing waters appears to be 0.1 mg/L total phosphorus, P. These values are not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time unless studies of the specific water body in question clearly show that water quality objective changes are permissible and changes are approved by the Regional Board. Analogous threshold values have not been set for nitrogen compounds; however, natural ratios of nitrogen to phosphorus are to be determined by surveillance and monitoring and upheld. If data are lacking, a ratio of N:P = 10:1, on a weight to weight basis shall be used (RWQCB, 2007) |
|
DECISION ID |
16528 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
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 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. Three of four of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for chlorpyrifos.
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. Three of four of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for chlorpyrifos 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: |
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: |
|
|
|
|
LOE ID: |
7037 |
|
Pollutant: |
Chlorpyrifos |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Not Recorded |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Warm Freshwater Habitat |
|
Number of Samples: |
4 |
Number of Exceedances: |
3 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Three of four samples exceeded the warm freshwater habitat water quality objective for Chlorpyrifos in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress reports from 2005 and 2006. Four samples were collected between October 2004 and February 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 and 2005.
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2005 and 2006.
|
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in the water column, sediments or biota at concentration(s) that adversely affect beneficial uses. Pesticides shall not be present at levels which will bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms to levels which are harmful to human health, wildlife or aquatic organisms (RWQCB, 2007). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9). |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
The 4-day average concentration of chlorpyrifos in freshwater is 0.014 ug/L. The 1-hour average concentration of chlorpyrifos in freshwater is 0.025 ug/L according to Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000; Finlayson, 2004. |
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 |
|
Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Warm Springs Creek near Murrieta.
Lat/long: 33°3156 N/117°1034 W. |
Temporal Representation: |
Two to three samples were collected per monitoring year. Samples were collected from October 2004 through February 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
One sample represents the first storm event of each monitoring year that produces sufficient flow to collect a composite sample. In addition, another sample is collected during the monitoring year to represent a wet weather event. Two dry sampling events are also required each monitoring year; however, only one dry event was monitored in the 2004-2005 monitoring year and no dry events in the 2005-2006 monitoring year due to low flow. |
QAPP Information: |
QA/QC conducted according to Federal Regulations under requirements of a NPDES permit. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
16534 |
|
Pollutant: |
Escherichia coli (E. Coli) |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
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 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. Four of five of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for Escherichia coli.
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. Four of five of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for Escherichia coli 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 16534 |
|
LOE ID: |
7404 |
|
Pollutant: |
Escherichia coli (E. Coli) |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
|
Number of Samples: |
5 |
Number of Exceedances: |
4 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Four out of five samples collected exceed the water quality objective according to results in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress report from 2005 and 2006. Samples were collected from October 2004 through May 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 and 2005.
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2005 and 2006.
|
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
The maximum E. coli level for moderately or lightly used areas is 406 colonies per 100 ml. |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9). |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Warm Springs Creek near Murrieta.
Lat/long: 33°3156 N/117°1034 W. |
Temporal Representation: |
Two to three samples were collected per monitoring year. Samples were collected from October 2004 through February 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
One sample represents the first storm event of each monitoring year that produces sufficient flow to collect a composite sample. In addition, another sample is collected during the monitoring year to represent a wet weather event. Two dry sampling events are also required each monitoring year; however, only one dry event was monitored in the 2004-2005 monitoring year and no dry events in the 2005-2006 monitoring year due to low flow. |
QAPP Information: |
QA/QC conducted according to Federal Regulations under requirements of a NPDES permit. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
16535 |
|
Pollutant: |
Fecal Coliform |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
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 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. Four of five of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for fecal coliform.
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. Four of five of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for fecal coliformand 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 16535 |
|
LOE ID: |
7182 |
|
Pollutant: |
Fecal Coliform |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
None |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Water Contact Recreation |
|
Number of Samples: |
5 |
Number of Exceedances: |
4 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Four out of five samples collected exceed the water quality objective according to results in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress report from 2005 and 2006. Samples were collected from October 2004 through February 2006. |
Data Reference: |
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 and 2005.
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2005 and 2006.
|
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan, no more than 10% of the samples during any 30-day period for waters designated for contact recreation shall exceed 400 per 100 ml (RWQCB, 2007). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9). |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Warm Springs Creek near Murrieta.
Lat/long: 33°3156 N/117°1034 W. |
Temporal Representation: |
Two to three samples were collected per monitoring year. Samples were collected from October 2004 through February 2006. |
Environmental Conditions: |
One sample represents the first storm event of each monitoring year that produces sufficient flow to collect a composite sample. In addition, another sample is collected during the monitoring year to represent a wet weather event. Two dry sampling events are also required each monitoring year; however, only one dry event was monitored in the 2004-2005 monitoring year and no dry events in the 2005-2006 monitoring year due to low flow. |
QAPP Information: |
QA/QC conducted according to Federal Regulations under requirements of a NPDES permit. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |
|
DECISION ID |
16530 |
|
Pollutant: |
Manganese |
Final Listing Decision: |
List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
Revision Status |
Original |
Sources: |
Natural Sources |
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 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 are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of three of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for manganese.
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. Two of three of the samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for manganese 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: |
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 16530 |
|
LOE ID: |
7040 |
|
Pollutant: |
Manganese |
LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
Matrix: |
Water |
Fraction: |
Total |
|
Beneficial Use: |
Municipal & Domestic Supply |
|
Number of Samples: |
3 |
Number of Exceedances: |
2 |
|
Data and Information Type: |
Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) |
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Two of three samples exceeded the warm freshwater habitat water quality objective for Manganese in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress reports from 2005 and 2006. Three samples were collected between October 2004 and March 2005. |
Data Reference: |
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 and 2005.
Watershed Annual Progress Report 2005 and 2006.
|
|
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
From the Basin Plan, inland surface waters designated as domestic or municipal supply shall not contain concentrations of manganese in excess of the secondary maximum contaminant level 0.05 mg/L (RWQCB, 2007). |
Objective/Criterion Reference: |
Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9). |
|
Evaluation Guideline: |
|
Guideline Reference: |
|
Spatial Representation: |
Samples were collected at Warm Springs Creek near Murrieta.
Lat/long: 33°3156 N/117°1034 W. |
Temporal Representation: |
Two to three samples were collected per monitoring year. Samples were collected from October 2004 through March 2005. |
Environmental Conditions: |
One sample represents the first storm event of each monitoring year that produces sufficient flow to collect a composite sample. In addition, another sample is collected during the monitoring year to represent a wet weather event. Two dry sampling events are also required each monitoring year; however, only one dry event was monitored in the 2004-2005 monitoring year and no dry events in the 2005-2006 monitoring year due to low flow. |
QAPP Information: |
QA/QC conducted according to Federal Regulations under requirements of a NPDES permit. |
QAPP Information Reference(s): |