Water Body Name: | Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
Water Body ID: | CAR9028300020011025112509 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
4781 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids |
Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Reason for Delisting: | Flaws in original listing |
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 one line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
No 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 placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. |
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 the data used for the assessment was for Long Canyon Creek in the 911 watershed, not 902. The LOE and Decision have been moved to the Long Canyon Creek in the Cottonwood watershed. |
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: | 3164 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
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 1997 and 1998. Six of the 25 samples were in exceedance. All 6 samples were collected on 01/29/1998. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
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 Long Canyon Creek site LCC2. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 03/12/1997, 05/13/1997, 06/18/1997, and 01/29/1998. Five to nine of the samples were collected per day over a period of 3 minutes to 1.5 hours. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data used in 2002 assessment. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
16559 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) |
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: | Regional Board Conclusion:
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 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. Four of the 4 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. Four of the 4 samples exceed the Basin Plan objective for E. 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. State Board Review and Conclusion: The San Diego Regional Board staff incorrectly determined the number of exceedances allowed using Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. The data being assessed had 4 exceedances out of 4 samples. Table 3.2 requires a minimum of 5 exceedances to List. State Board staff re-evaluated the existing data with the correct application of Table 3.2 and the recommendation has been revised to Not List for E. Coli. The revised recommendation is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 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. Four of the 4 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. The minimum sample requirement according to table 3.2 of the Listing Policy is five. 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 the 4 samples exceed the Basin Plan objective for E. Coli 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 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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
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. |
USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7150 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All four samples collected exceed the water quality objective according to the results in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress report from 2005 and 2006. Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05 and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The maximum E. coli level for moderately or lightly used areas is 406 colonies per 100 ml (RWQCB, 2007). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Long Canyon Creek.
Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05 and 2/27/06. | ||||
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. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
DECISION ID |
16699 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus |
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. Four of the 4 samples exceed the water quality objective. According to Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy the minimum sample requirement is five. 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. Four of the 4 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded due to limited samples. |
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: | 6266 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All four samples collected exceed the evaluation guideline according to results in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress reports. Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water bodies shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growth to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (RWQCB, 2007).
The Water Quality Control Plan for San Diego Basin Plan which has a goal of 0.1 mg/L for total phosphorus in streams and other flowing waters (RWQCB, 2007). |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at station 780 Long Canyon Creek.
Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
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. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
DECISION ID |
16700 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
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. Four of the 4 samples exceed the water quality objective. According to table 3.2 of the Listing Policy, the minimum sample requirement to assess conventional pollutants is 5. 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. Four of the 4 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 it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded due to limited samples. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision: |
USEPA Action (if applicable): | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 6265 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All four samples collected exceed the evaluation guideline of 1 mg/L according to results in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District annual progress report from 2005 and 2006. Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water bodies shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growth to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (RWQCB, 2007).
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). |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at station 780 Long Canyon Creek.
Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
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. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
DECISION ID |
16520 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
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: | 2019 |
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. Three of the 4 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. Three of the 4 samples exceed the Basin Plan objective for pesticides 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. |
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 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: | 6456 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
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 out of four samples exceeded 1-hour average concentration of Chlorpyrifos according to results in the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District's Watershed Annual Progress Report from 2005 and 2006. Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
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 | ||||
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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at station 780 on Long Canyon Creek. Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
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. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
DECISION ID |
16560 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
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 | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 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. Four of the 4 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. Four of the 4 samples exceed the Basin Plan objective for Fecal Coliform 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 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: | 7398 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All four 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 on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05 and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Long Canyon Creek.
Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05 and 2/27/06. | ||||
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. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
DECISION ID |
16518 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
Pollutant: | Iron |
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: | 2019 |
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. Four of the 4 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. Four of the 4 samples exceed the secondary drinking water MCL for iron 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. |
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 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: | 6264 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All four 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 on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Basin Plan, inland surface waters designated as domestic or municipal supply, shall not contain concentrations of iron in excess of the secondary maximum contaminant level 0.3 mg/L (RWQCB, 2007). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Long Canyon Creek.
Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
DECISION ID |
16519 |
Region 9 |
Long Canyon Creek (tributary to Murrieta Creek) |
||
Pollutant: | Manganese |
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: | 2019 |
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. Four of the 4 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. Four of the 4 samples exceed the secondary drinking water MCL for Mn 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. |
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 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: | 6458 | ||||
Pollutant: | Manganese | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All four 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 on 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
Data Reference: | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at station 780 on Long Canyon Creek. Lat/long: 33°3038 N/117°0940 W. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 10/20/04, 12/28/04, 10/18/05, and 2/27/06. | ||||
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. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality assurance conducted according to the Riverside County's Consolidated Monitoring Plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Watershed Annual Progress Report 2004 to 2005 and 2005 to 2006 | ||||