Water Body Name: | Cucamonga Creek Reach 2 (Mountain Reach) |
Water Body ID: | CAR8012402019991013163906 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
13070 |
Region 8 |
Cucamonga Creek Reach 2 (Mountain Reach) |
||
Pollutant: | Barium |
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 3.1 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of eight (8) samples exceeded the USEPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Human Health Protection non cancer health effects for sources of drinking water 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. |
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 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 Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8308 | ||||
Pollutant: | Barium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | of the 8 samples collected, none exceeded the guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan Objective - Toxic Substances: The concentrations of contaminants in waters which are existing or potential sources of drinking water shall not occur at levels which are harmful to human health. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Human Health Protection non cancer health effects for sources of drinking water - 1000 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Compilation of Water Quality Goals | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station in Cucamonga Creek above Ely Basin. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected over a period of several times per month during several years beginning with 7/7/2003 thorugh 8/11/2004. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
13023 |
Region 8 |
Cucamonga Creek Reach 2 (Mountain Reach) |
||
Pollutant: | Boron |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 (1) 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of sixty-six (66) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective respectively, 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. |
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 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 Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8306 | ||||
Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 66 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 66 samples collected, none exceeded the Basin Plan's objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan Objective - 0.75 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station in Cucamonga Creek above Ely Basin. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected over a period of several times per month during several years beginning with 7/7/2003 thorugh 2/21/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
13050 |
Region 8 |
Cucamonga Creek Reach 2 (Mountain Reach) |
||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N |
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 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two (2) 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. Two (2) of forty-three (43) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
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 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 Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7991 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 43 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 43 samples taken 2 samples exceeded the Basin Plan's objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Objective: Total Inorganic Nitrogen - 10 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station in Cucamonga Creek Near Mira Loma. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month for a period of several years beginning with 4/5/2006 through 2/21/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
13051 |
Region 8 |
Cucamonga Creek Reach 2 (Mountain Reach) |
||
Pollutant: | pH |
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: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Thirty (30) 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 in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Thirty (30) of sixty-eight (68) samples exceed the Basin Plan Objective 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. |
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 section 303(d) list because 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 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 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: | 7984 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 82 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 60 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 82 field measurements taken 60 exceeded the Basin Plan's objective of 8.5 pH units. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Objective: 6.5 - 8.5 pH units | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station in Cucamonga Creek Near Mira Loma. The measurements were taken in the field with a calibrated intstrument. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month for a period of several years beginning with 7/7/2003 through 2/21/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||