| Water Body Name: | Damon Slough |
| Water Body ID: | CAR2042004020080626134918 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
7638 |
Region 2 |
Damon Slough |
||
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Sources: | Illegal dumping | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
| 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 3.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.11, listing may be proposed based on the situation-specific weight of evidence.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Both lines of evidence involve inspection of photographic evidence by Regional Water Board staff trained to conduct the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) methodology. The staff inspected these photos and applied the RTA methodology both to develop Category 1 (Level of Trash, linked to non-contact beneficial use) and Category 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life, linked to wildlife habitat beneficial use) scores for each photograph. Based on the readily available photographic evidence for this waterbody, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination to the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. Photographic evidence has been evaluated that supports this decision. 2. Applying the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology to the photographic evidence suggests that this waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at three locations on nine different dates. This waterbody also had threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at three different locations on ten different dates. 3. This waterbody is considered impaired by trash because there were exceedances of the evaluation guidelines (poor condition category for the trash assessment metrics) in more than one location or on more than one date. 4. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 5. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1 of the Policy. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available evidence, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not met and trash 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: | 5407 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 16 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data available consist of photographic evidence of trash and interpretation of these photos by an experienced trash assessment specialist. Each photograph was analyzed to establish the RTA score for the level of trash and threat to aquatic life parameters, which relate to impairment of REC2 and WILD, respectively. Only those photos clear enough to establish these RTA scores were relied on for the listing determination. These results are available for the following dates and locations on Damon Slough:
Damon Slough on 12/20/02, 1/1/97, 3/10/99, 12/10/03, 12/16/04, 1/5/05, 12/19/05, 1/11/06, 3/29/06, 4/1/06, and 2/23/07 Coliseum on 12/19/05, 1/11/06, 3/29/06, 4/11/06, and 2/23/07 San Leandro Channel and Bay on 1/5/05 and 1/11/06 This waterbody had threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at three different locations on ten different dates. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Report from Roger James and Larry Kolb containing Trash Photos submitted for consideration in 2008 303(d) listing process | ||||
| Assessment by Matt Cover of Trash Photos (submitted to Region 2 in response to 2008 Data Solicitation) | |||||
| Archive of Trash Photos for Damon Slough submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of Rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.
The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Level of Trash score.
If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Threat to Aquatic Life score. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Photographic evidence was analyzed using the RTA methodology for this waterbody for three different locations spanning dates from 2001 through 2007. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Photographic evidence was collected for this waterbody on ten separate dates from 1997 through 2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Assessments of the photographic evidence using the RTA were performed by Regional Water Board staff person who was a co-author of the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.
Assessments based on photographic evidence were only conducted when sufficient reach-scale and close-up photos were available for a site on a specific date. Photos used for the evaluation needed to be numerous enough and clear enough to document the level of trash at the site in a similar way as the assessor would experience during an actual site visit in the field. For example, at a minimum, one reach-scale photograph (showing at least a 100 linear foot section of the waterbody) and two close-up photographs (of representative trash deposits) were required. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 5408 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 12 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data available consist of photographic evidence of trash and interpretation of these photos by an experienced trash assessment specialist. Each photograph was analyzed to establish the RTA score for the level of trash and threat to aquatic life parameters, which relate to impairment of REC2 and WILD, respectively. Only those photos clear enough to establish these RTA scores were relied on for the listing determination. These results are available for the following dates and locations on Damon Slough:
Damon Slough on 12/20/02, 1/1/97, 3/10/99, 12/10/03, 12/16/04, 1/5/05, 12/19/05, 1/11/06, 3/29/06, 4/1/06, and 2/23/07 Coliseum on 12/19/05, 1/11/06, 3/29/06, 4/11/06, and 2/23/07 San Leandro Channel and Bay on 1/5/05 and 1/11/06 This waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at three locations on nine different dates. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Report from Roger James and Larry Kolb containing Trash Photos submitted for consideration in 2008 303(d) listing process | ||||
| Assessment by Matt Cover of Trash Photos (submitted to Region 2 in response to 2008 Data Solicitation) | |||||
| Archive of Trash Photos for Damon Slough submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of Rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.
The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Level of Trash score.
If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Threat to Aquatic Life score. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Photographic evidence was analyzed using the RTA methodology for this waterbody for three different locations spanning dates from 2001 through 2007. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Photographic evidence was collected for this waterbody on ten separate dates from 1997 through 2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Assessments of the photographic evidence using the RTA were performed by Regional Water Board staff person who was a co-author of the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.
Assessments based on photographic evidence were only conducted when sufficient reach-scale and close-up photos were available for a site on a specific date. Photos used for the evaluation needed to be numerous enough and clear enough to document the level of trash at the site in a similar way as the assessor would experience during an actual site visit in the field. For example, at a minimum, one reach-scale photograph (showing at least a 100 linear foot section of the waterbody) and two close-up photographs (of representative trash deposits) were required. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||