| Water Body Name: | Compton Creek |
| Water Body ID: | CAR4051501019990202111430 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
16468 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | 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 |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 a one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is 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 one samples exhibited significant toxicity to Pimephales promelas and Ceriodaphnia dubia 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 two samples is needed for application of table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 28251 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero out of one samples exhibited significant acute and chronic toxicity to Pimephales promelas and Ceriodaphnia dubia. Water quality samples for toxicity were taken in compliance with the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program's monitoring and testing parameters. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program data for all watersheds in the Los Angeles Region 2001-2005. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan states at there shall be no acute or chronic toxicity in ambient waters outside mixing zones. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| 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 Fisher's Exact Test). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. EPA 600/4-90/27. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Water toxicity monitoring was conducted in Compton Creek at station 412LARCMP (Lat: 33.84644, Long: -118.20883). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | A grab sample was taken on 06/30/2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with the sampling and monitoring procedures detailed in the Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
17213 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Regional Board Conclusion:
This pollutant is being considered for the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, waters are listed when a bioassessment shows diminished numbers of species or other metrics (compared to a reference site) and it is associated with another pollutant. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Benthic macroinvertebrates as measured by Southern California IBI (Index of Biological Integrity) in Compton Creek were very poor in October of 2003 and very poor in October of 2004 indicating impairment of benthic community structure. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification to place the water segment in Category 4C of the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. There is at least one bioassessment sample (Index of Biological Integrity score) to satisfy Section 3.9. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. State Board Review and Conclusion: State Water Board staff used a situation-specific weight of evidence approach to evaluate the Los Angeles Water Board benthic macroinvertebratebioassessment listing. State Water Board staff determined that it is necessary to include these listings because additional data analyses and multiple line of evidence show that benthic macroinvertebrate populations are impacted by a wide range of stressors. Using this approach staff followed a three-step process for evaluation of all available water quality data including the chemistry, bioassessment data and toxicity. In the first step, staff reviewed the Los Angeles Water Board data evaluation for bioassessment listing. In the second step, staff reviewed all other available bioassessment data because State Water Board staff learned that some data had not been considered for this listing decision by the Regional Water Board. In step 3 staff reviewed the chemistry water quality data available for coliform bacteria, copper, lead, toxicity, trash, dissolved oxygen and pH to determine the water quality condition in this water body segment. In step 1 and 2, State Water Board staff evaluated the bioassessment data using the Southern California index of biological integrity (IBI). Staff reviewed the line of evidence prepared by the Los Angeles Water Board and additional bioassessment data. Benthic macroinvertebrate as measured by Southern California IBI in Compton Creek were poor in 2003 and 2004 indicating impairment of benthic community structure. In step 3, the water quality data for coliform bacteria, copper, lead, trash, dissolved oxygen and pH were evaluated by State Water Board staff. Data for coliform bacteria, copper, lead, trash, and pH were evaluated in a previous listing cycle. Coliform bacteria, copper, lead, trash, and pH showed impairment to the warm freshwater habitat, water contact recreation, and non-contact recreation and it resulted in listing this water body in 1996 and 2006. In this step State Water Board staff evaluated the most recent available data for dissolved oxygen. The data for dissolved oxygen show that 1 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality objective. The weight of evidence of the data and information indicate that the beneficial use of the water is not supported. The water quality chemistry and bioassessment data provide a substantial basis that benthic macroinvertebrate populations are impacted by a wide range of anthropogenic stressors. Based on the available data and information, staff recommend to list for benthic macroinvertebrate-bioassessment. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be added to the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being attained. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 30224 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wetland Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The IBI scores at this site ranked in the very poor range (1 in 2003 and 3 in 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 5, Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area, pp5.1 - 5.40 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan Objectives for Toxicity which states All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or 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 appropraite methods as specified by the State or Regional Board. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked according to very good (80-56), good (41-55), fair (27-40), poor (14-26) and very poor (0-13) habitat conditions. Sites with scores below 26 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams. Appendix 7-B Environmental Management Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 493-504. | ||||
| Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 3, Methods, pp3.1 - 3.28 | |||||
| Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 5, Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area, pp5.1 - 5.40 | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | One site in Compton Creek was sampled, upstream
of the confluence with the Los Angeles River, at N 33º 50.784 W 118º 12.528. |
||||
| Temporal Representation: | Sites were sampled in October of 2003 and October of 2004. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Benthic macroinvertebrate populations and IBI scores may also be affected by a wide range of anthropogenic stressors. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with California Stream Bioassessment Procedure. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (Protocol Brief for Biological and Physical/Habitat Assessment in Wadeable Streams) California Department of Fish and Game Water Pollution Control Laboratory Aquatic Bioassessment Laboratory Revision Date - December, 2003 | ||||
| Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 3, Methods, pp3.1 - 3.28 | |||||
DECISION ID |
6830 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| 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: | Nonpoint Source |
| TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Trash (12) |
| TMDL Project Code: | 365 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 07/24/2008 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 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.
Four 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. |
| Regional Board Decision 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. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2473 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Visual | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | QUALITATIVE (EVALUATED) ASSESSMENT - UNSPECIFIED | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Photos showing large amounts of trash throughout Compton Creek. Heal the Bay states that they have been the Los Angeles County Coordinator for Coastal Clean-Up Day and Earth Day at 15 over 60 locations over the last 15 years. According to Heal the Bay, none of these other locations has ever come close to being as polluted with trash as Compton Creek. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Waters shall not contain floating materials, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Various locations throughout Compton Creek. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Photos taken between 2002 and 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 30162 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-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 Trash TMDL for the Los Angeles River Watershed was adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB on August 09, 2007 and subsequently approved by USEPA. The TMDL was been integrated into the Basin Plan as Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2007-012. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| 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: | 2474 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | -N/A | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Los Angeles County Department of Public Works removed 135.18 tons of trash from Compton Creek between July of 2002 and October of 2005 (Heal the Bay, 2006). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Waters shall not contain floating materials, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Compton Creek. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Trash removed between July of 2002 and October of 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2475 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | -N/A | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Volunteers removed 26.5 tons of trash from Compton Creek on Coastal Clean Up Days and Earth Days between 2002 and 2005 (Heal the Bay, 2006). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Waters shall not contain floating materials, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Compton Creek. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Coastal Clean Up Day (September 21, 2002; September 20, 2003; September 18, 2004; September 17, 2005) and Earth Day (April 1, 2003; April 17, 2004; April 30, 2005). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Heal the Bay. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
7119 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Coliform Bacteria |
| 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: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2009 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4094 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Coliform Bacteria | ||||
| 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) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| 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): | |||||
DECISION ID |
6693 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Copper |
| 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 (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
| TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
| TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 12/22/2005 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the standard. Based on the readily available information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the section 303(d) list. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2476 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
6694 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Lead |
| 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 (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
| TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
| TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 12/22/2005 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the standard. Based on the readily available information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the section 303(d) list. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2477 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
4238 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| 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 (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2006) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
| TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Nitrogen (11) |
| TMDL Project Code: | 229 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/18/2004 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the applicable factor, a TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the standard. The Los Angeles River Nitrogen TMDL was approved by USEPA on 3-18-2004. 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 in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the section 303(d) list. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
| USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2472 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||