Final California 2012 Integrated Report( 303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 9 - San Diego Region

Water Body Name:	Paleta Creek
Water Body ID:	CAR9083100020080825092823
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	29206	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Arsenic
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 for arsenic. 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 three samples exceeded the arsenic water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29206, Arsenic	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7160

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the 3 samples exceed the water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR the Arsenic water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 340 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 150 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29002	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Cadmium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 for cadmium. 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 the three samples exceeded the cadmium water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29002, Cadmium	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7162

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the three samples exceed the water quality objective from results in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Cadmium water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 4.3 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 2.2 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29207	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Chromium (total)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the three 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. One of three samples exceeded the chromium water quality obective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29207, Chromium (total)	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7164

Pollutant:

Chromium (total)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of three samples exceeded the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Chromium water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 16 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 11 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29178	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Nickel
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 for Nickel. 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 three samples exceeded the Nickel water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29178, Nickel	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7172

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the three samples exceed the chronic water quality objectives as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Nickel water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 460 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 52 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29179	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Selenium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 for selenium. 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 three samples exceeded the selenium water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29179, Selenium	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7167

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the three samples exceeded the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Selenium water quality objective for continuous freshwater concentration is 5.0 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29003	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Silver
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 for silver. 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 three samples exceeded the silver water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29003, Silver	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7170

Pollutant:

Silver

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

None of the single sample exceed the acute water quality as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Silver water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 3.4 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29219	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Zinc
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 for zinc. 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. One of three samples exceeded the zinc water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29219, Zinc	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7171

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

One of three samples exceed the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the zinc water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 120 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 120 ug/L

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2007.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29208	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Copper
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)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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. All three of the samples exceed the water quality objective for copper. 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. All three samples exceed the copper water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29208, Copper	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7166

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

All three samples exceeded the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Copper water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 14 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 9 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	29218	Region 9
Paleta Creek

Pollutant:	Lead
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)(2010)
Revision Status	Original
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. All three 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. All three of the samples exceed the lead water quality objective 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:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. 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 Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	Region 9 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 29218, Lead	Region 9
Paleta Creek

LOE ID:

7168

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

All three samples exceed the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.

Data Reference:

Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

From the CTR, the Lead water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 82 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 3 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.

Temporal Representation:

Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.

QAPP Information Reference(s):