Water Body Name: | Pismo Creek |
Water Body ID: | CAR3102601420020124125144 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
83219 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chloride |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seventy-two of the 89 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Seventy-two of the 89 samples exceed the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50966 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 34 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 34 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when chloride exceeds 106 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10113 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 52 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 38 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 38 of 52 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when chloride exceeds 106 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80979 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.3 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
The sample size for the evaluation guideline for non-contact recreation for Escherichia coli (E.coli) is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported using table 4.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Sixteen of 63 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986) set to protect for water contact recreation (i.e. swimming, wading etc.) and 1 of 25 samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation. ]. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Sixteen of 63 samples exceed the evaluation guideline set to protect for water contact recreation (i.e. swimming, wading etc.) and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10812 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. E. coli is a fecal coliform. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-11/15/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10811 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 10 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 10 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli in freshwater is 235 MPN/100mL (as stated in Table 4, page 15) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/10/2005-11/15/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51028 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Escherichia coli. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Single sample maximum allowable density for E. coli in freshwater is 235 MPN/100mL (as stated in Table 4, page 15 of the USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
74714 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.3 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Thirty one of 95 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for contact recreation (i.e. swimming, wading etc.) and 4 of 95 samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Thirty one of the 95 samples exceed the evaluation guideline set to protect for water contact recreation (i.e. swimming, wading etc.) and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51027 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 8 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 200 MPN/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN/100 ml. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10733 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 57 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 23 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 23 of 57 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 200 MPN/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400 MPN/100 ml. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-11/15/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50957 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10734 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 57 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 57 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: Fecal coliform concentration, based on a minimum of not less than five samples for any 30-day period, shall not exceed a log mean of 2000/100 ml, nor shall more than ten percent of samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 4000/100 ml. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-11/15/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
83543 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Twelve lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two water quality objectives are assessed. Forty-nine of the 109 samples exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in Cold Freshwater Habitats and 27 of the 109 samples also exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in Warm Freshwater Habitats. The Basin Plan general water quality objective for oxygen saturation states that the median value shall not fall below 85% saturation. However, the oxygen saturation objective is only applied ¿for waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use¿¿ and this water body is designated for both Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitats. Therefore, the use support rating for oxygen saturation is set at Insufficient Information. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Forty-nine of the 109 samples exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in Cold Freshwater Habitats and 27 of the 109 samples also exceeded the water quality objective for dissolved oxygen in Warm Freshwater Habitats. Each of these exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12586 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Cold Water Habitat Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12552 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 39 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 39 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12588 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 11 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51009 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 35 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 35 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12551 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12587 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50972 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 19 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 19 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 5.0 mg/l at any time (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51008 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 26 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 26 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12537 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 17 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 17 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Cold Water Habitat Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below 7.0 mg/l at any time. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12589 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 11 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50973 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 35 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 35 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12553 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 39 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 39 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: Median values should not fall below 85% saturation as a result of controllable water quality conditions. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74707 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Sodium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eighty-one of the 89 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Eighty-one of the 89 samples exceed the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50982 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 36 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 36 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when sodium exceeds 69 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 9875 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 52 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 45 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 45 of 52 samples exceed the criterion for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when sodium exceeds 69 mg/L in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
83218 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Ammonia |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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.
The pollutant name was changed from ¿Unionized Ammonia¿ to ¿Ammonia¿ in the 2014 assessment cycle. This decision replaces the two previously approved decisions, one for each of the pollutants unionized ammonia and total ammonia. This decision contains all of the LOEs from those decisions in addition to new LOEs. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Six lines of evidence (LOEs) are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four LOEs summarize unionized ammonia data in which zero of the 95 samples exceed the water quality objective for unionized ammonia set to protect aquatic life. Two LOEs summarize total ammonia data and zero of the 97 samples exceed the EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia in drinking water. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the samples exceed the water quality objectives 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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10109 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | USEPA Health Advisory 2006 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure." | ||||
Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50994 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) . | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10110 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) . | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10111 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4) . | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50960 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 (General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries) states that the discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of unionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in receiving waters (page III-4). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51013 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia as Nitrogen | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia As N, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | EPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. This Advisory Level is defined as "the concentration of a chemical in drinking water that is not expected to cause any adverse noncarcinogenic effects for up to ten days of exposure." | ||||
Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
74584 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Anthracene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15667 | ||||
Pollutant: | Anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for anthracene is 845 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15668 | ||||
Pollutant: | Anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for anthracene is 845 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74472 |
Region 3 |
Pismo 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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15739 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for arsenic is 33 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15753 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for arsenic is 33 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
85864 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating the Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. The single sample exceeded the water quality objective.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this water segment 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. The single sample was below the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) score of 0.79 which indicates poor water quality for this area. This sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
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 there is not enough information showing that applicable water quality standards are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 56803 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The IBI score in this water body was 39 or lower and therefore is below the impairment threshold of the Southern California IBI. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences 2008 2009 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores of 39 or less are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams. Environmental Management. Volume 35, number 1 (2005): pp. 1-13 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Surveys done at the following station: 310PISxxx-Pismo Creek above Highway 101, Frady Lane Bridge. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Surveys done on April 29, 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected following SWAMP QA Protocols for the Central Coast Ambient Monitoring Program. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 79406 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The CSCI score for this site is 0.561762476. This site is below the 0.79 threshold, and is therefore exceeding the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences 2008 2009 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rhen, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows: greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for aquatic life beneficial use support. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Surveys done at the following station: 310PISxxx-Pismo Creek above Highway 101, Frady Lane Bridge. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Surveys done on April 29, 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected following SWAMP QA Protocols for the Central Coast Ambient Monitoring Program. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74410 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15809 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Benzo(a)anthracene is 1050 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15808 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Benzo(a)anthracene is 1050 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74522 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15435 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Benzo(a)Pyrene is 1450 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15422 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Benzo(a)Pyrene is 1450 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74521 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Boron |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seven of the 89 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Seven of the 89 samples exceed the 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: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50965 | ||||
Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 7 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Boron, dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3-4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for boron for irrigation supply is 0.75 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10112 | ||||
Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 52 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 52 samples exceed the criterion for Boron, dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3.4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for boron for irrigation supply is 0.75 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80886 |
Region 3 |
Pismo 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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15536 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cadmium is 4.98 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15535 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cadmium is 4.98 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74695 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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.
Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four of the 93 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (North Carolina Administrative code, Title 15A) used to interpret the narrative water quality objective for bio-stimulation risk and aquatic life beneficial uses. 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Four of the 93 samples exceed the evaluation guideline 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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12571 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/3/2001. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50969 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 9889 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 55 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 55 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12572 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/3/2001. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50995 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 37 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 9876 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorophyll-a | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 55 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 55 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorophyll a. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (general objective for biostimulatory substances, Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water quality standards table | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | North Carolina Administrative code (NCAC), Title 15A - Environmental and Natural Resources, Subchapter 2B-Surface water and wetland standards, Rule 0211-Fresh surface water quality standards for class C waters (Class C is defined as freshwaters protected for secondary recreation, fishing, aquatic life including propagation and survival, and wildlife). Section 3(a) of Rule 0211 applies to all fresh surface waters and states that chlorophyll a is not to exceed 40 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Guideline Reference: | North Carolina standards, criteria, or toxic concentrations. Adopted per title 15A North Carolina Administrative Code subchapter 2B - Surface water and wetland standards | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74608 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | No new data are assessed. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment. The pollutant concentration in sediment must be associated with toxicity to result in addition of the pollutant to the Section 303(d) list. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single water samples exceeded the Evaluation Guideline (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. The single sediment sample (pore water) did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. There is no chlorpyrifos evaluation guideline specific to "sediment, interstitial water" (pore water). LOEs summarizing pore water results will not be the sole basis for any decision. 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. The single water sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16227 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16111 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16228 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16124 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.025 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
75021 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chromium |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with toxicity to result in adding that pollutant to the Section 303(d) list.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15977 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium (total) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for chromium is 111 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15978 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium (total) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for chromium is 111 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74856 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16062 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chrysene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Chrysene is 1290 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16063 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chrysene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Chrysene is 1290 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74855 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with toxicity to result in adding that pollutant to the Section 303(d) list.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15879 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cooper is 149 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 15892 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for cooper is 149 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
81038 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Diazinon |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | No new data are assessed. This decision has not changed from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment. The pollutant concentration in sediment must be associated with toxicity to result in addition of the pollutant to the Section 303(d) list. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Finlayson, 2004) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. The single sediment sample (pore water) did not exceed the evaluation guideline (Finalyson, 2004). There is no diazinon evaluation guideline specific to "sediment, interstitial water" (pore water). LOEs summarizing pore water results will not be the sole basis for any decision. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (Finlayson, 2004) applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16717 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16865 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16772 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16864 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | One hour average maximum concentration 0.16 ug/L as stated in Sipmann and Finlayson (2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74356 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16733 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for dieldrin is 61.8 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16732 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for dieldrin is 61.8 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
75078 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Endrin |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16420 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for endrin is 207 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16419 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for endrin is 207 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80887 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16504 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fluoranthene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Fluoranthene is 2,230 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16517 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fluoranthene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Fluoranthene is 2,230 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74420 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Fluorene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16381 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluorene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fluorene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for fluorene is 536 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16382 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluorene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fluorene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for fluorene is 536 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74419 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Lead |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17217 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Lead. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for lead is 128 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17216 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Lead. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for lead is 128 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80933 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Mercury |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17314 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for mercury is 1.06 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17301 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for mercury is 1.06 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74307 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Naphthalene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17367 | ||||
Pollutant: | Naphthalene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Naphthalene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for naphthalene is 561 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17368 | ||||
Pollutant: | Naphthalene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Naphthalene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for naphthalene is 561 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74583 |
Region 3 |
Pismo 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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16937 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for nickel is 48.6 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16936 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for nickel is 48.6 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
86699 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrate |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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.
Ten lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 97 nitrate samples and zero of the 40 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the water quality objectives for the Agricultural Supply and Municipal and Domestic Supply beneficial uses. Four of the 38 nitrate samples and four of the 40 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the Central Coast Region evaluation guideline for Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitat. The final use rating is set to 'insufficient information' because the following supporting evidence does not make a strong case for the nutrient concentrations causing or contributing to eutrophic conditions: 1) Dissolved oxygen for this water body ranged from 0.51 mg/L to 13.12 mg/L, often exceeding (falling below) the Cold Freshwater Habitat water quality objective of 7.0 mg/L. 2) Water column chlorophyll a concentration ranged up to 150 ug/L, at times exceeding the screening threshold of 15 ug/L (R3 NNE Technical Report, 2010). 3) Using site-specific data from this waterbody, the California Benthic Biomass Predictor Tool, v. 13 (Tetratech, 2007) predicted a benthic algal contribution to oxygen deficit for this water body that was below the screening threshold. 4) Using site-specific data from this waterbody, the California Benthic Biomass Predictor Tool, v. 13 (Tetratech, 2007) predicted algae biomass concentrations within the range of acceptable concentrations. This supporting evidence does show that eutrophic conditions sometimes occur but the model does not predict them based on the known nutrient concentrations in the creek. Furthermore, staff have observed seeps at this location and stagnant flow conditions. These are both likely to contribute to the low dissolved oxygen conditions. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is in sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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 38 nitrate samples and four of the 40 nitrate/nitrite samples exceed the Central Coast Region evaluation guideline for Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitat and although this does exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, there is insufficient supporting evidence indicating presence of or risk of eutrophication cause by nutrients. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50996 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Technical Approach to Develop Nutrient Numeric Endpoints for California. U.S. EPA Region IX. State Water Resources Control Board. 68-C-02-108-To-111 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50968 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 9873 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when nitrate exceeds 30 mg/L NO3 as N in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50971 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Technical Approach to Develop Nutrient Numeric Endpoints for California. U.S. EPA Region IX. State Water Resources Control Board. 68-C-02-108-To-111 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51024 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (NO3 as N) incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 10.0 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 9874 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin Objective for municipal and domestic supply uses of inland surface waters (Section II.A.2) states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Article 4, Chapter 15, Section 64435, Tables 2 and 3 as listed in Table 3-2. The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 3-2 (inorganic and fluoride concentrations not to be exceeded in domestic or municipal supply) for nitrate is 10.0 mg/L (NO3 as N). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50970 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Technical Approach to Develop Nutrient Numeric Endpoints for California. U.S. EPA Region IX. State Water Resources Control Board. 68-C-02-108-To-111 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50979 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3-4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for nitrate + nitrite for livestock watering is 100 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50997 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Technical approach to develop nutrient numeric endpoints for California, Tetra Tech, June 2006. The Central Coast Region numeric target for maximum nitrate concentration is based on the Tetra Tech NNE (Nutrient Numeric Endpoint) Model and CCAMP data for 193 sites, monitored monthly for at least 1 year between January 1998 and December 2006. The model numeric target for aquatic life habitats in the Central Coast Region is 1.0 mg/L Nitrate as N. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Technical Approach to Develop Nutrient Numeric Endpoints for California. U.S. EPA Region IX. State Water Resources Control Board. 68-C-02-108-To-111 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Central Coast RegionTechnical Paper: Interpreting Narrative Objectives for Biostimulatory Substances for California Central Coast Waters. This method uses the Technical Approach for Developing California Nutrient Numeric Endpoints. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51025 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 10.0 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
83651 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Zero of the 39 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 39 samples exceed the 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: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50980 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 39 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 39 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. In addition, waters used for irrigation and livestock watering shall not exceed concentrations for those chemicals listed in Table 3-4 (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). Table 3-4 (page III-9) lists the maximum concentration for nitrite for livestock watering is 10 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
80934 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17036 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Phenanthrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Phenanthrene is 1170 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17035 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Phenanthrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Phenanthrene is 1170 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74706 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Pyrene |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16913 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Pyrene is 1520 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 16899 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for Pyrene is 1520 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
83489 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | No new data were assessed.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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. Note that the pollutant name for the older LOEs and decisions is electrical conductivity. This was an error and the pollutant name should have always been specific conductivity. For this reason, the pollutant name was changed for this decision and sample and exceedance counts are summed for LOEs with both pollutant names in this assessment for specific conductivity. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 86 samples exceed the water quality objective for agricultural uses. 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the 86 samples exceed the water quality 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: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10735 | ||||
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50967 | ||||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 41 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3000 uS/cm in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10789 | ||||
Pollutant: | Electrical Conductivity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when conductivity exceeds 3.0 mS/cm in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80978 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 109 samples exceed the evaluation guideline (Moyle 1976) applied to protect the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 109 samples exceed the evaluation guideline 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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12570 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 58 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (General Objective in Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51012 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages of rainbow trout is 13-21 degrees Celsius (Moyle 1976). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12607 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses (General Objective in Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
91825 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Toxicity |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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.
Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day and time at the same location. Two LOEs summarize sediment samples. One sediment sample is summarized in LOEs using the test organism as the pollutant (i.e. invertebrate toxicity). Zero of the one sediment samples resulted in a significant toxic effect to one or more test organisms. Sixteen LOEs summarize water samples. One water sample is summarized in LOEs using each of the test organisms as the pollutant name (i.e. plant toxicity, invertebrate toxicity or vertebrate toxicity) and two water samples are summarized in LOEs using the pollutant name ¿toxicity¿. Therefore, three total samples are available to assess toxic effects in water samples. Zero of the three water samples resulted in a significant toxic effect to one or more test organisms. 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 CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the three samples exceed the 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: | 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. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 24589 | ||||
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 59002 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. One of the samples exhibited significant toxicity to Selenastrum capricornutum but had no significant effects to either Ceriodaphnia dubia, or Pimephales promelas. The significant effect to Selenastrum is not counted as an exceedance here because the conductivity of the sample water was above the threshold for which a high salinity control should have been used to evaluate the toxicity of the sample. SWAMP guidance (July 2013) for Selenastrum capricornutum toxicity testing is twofold; 1) inclusion of appropriate salinity controls when sample conductivities exceed 1500 uS/cm and 2) if conductivity exceeds 3000 uS/cm, use alternate species or forgo testing. The conductivity of the sample water from September 22, 2009 was higher than 1500 uS/cm but the significance of the toxic effect for the sample result was not calculated using the high salinity control sample and therefore is not counted as an exceedance. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences 2008 2009 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 3 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. The SL code is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | SWAMP_Memo_Toxicity_Data_Intrepretation | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station 310PISxxx - Pismo Creek at Rail Road Bridge. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in March and September 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 79542 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. One of the samples exhibited significant toxicity to Selenastrum capricornutum but had no significant effects to either Ceriodaphnia dubia, or Pimephales promelas. The significant effect to Selenastrum is not counted as an exceedance here because the conductivity of the sample water was above the threshold for which a high salinity control should have been used to evaluate the toxicity of the sample. SWAMP guidance (July 2013) for Selenastrum capricornutum toxicity testing is twofold; 1) inclusion of appropriate salinity controls when sample conductivities exceed 1500 uS/cm and 2) if conductivity exceeds 3000 uS/cm, use alternate species or forgo testing. The conductivity of the sample water from September 22, 2009 was higher than 1500 uS/cm but the significance of the toxic effect for the sample result was not calculated using the high salinity control sample and therefore is not counted as an exceedance. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences 2008 2009 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 3 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. The SL code is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fifth Edition. EPA-821-R-02-012 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | SWAMP_Memo_Toxicity_Data_Intrepretation | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station 310PISxxx - Pismo Creek at Rail Road Bridge. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in March and September 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 24623 | ||||
Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Pimephales promelas Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 23956 | ||||
Pollutant: | Vertebrate Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Pimephales promelas Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 24611 | ||||
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Hyalella azteca Survival (%) 10 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 24601 | ||||
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Hyalella azteca Survival (%) 10 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 24588 | ||||
Pollutant: | Invertebrate Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (00SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Toxicity, Ceriodaphnia dubia Survival (%) 7 days. Toxicity is defined by SWAMP (2004) as follows: Significant toxicity in the survival endpoint when compared to the negative control based on a statistical test with alpha of less than 5%, and less than the evaluation threshold (both criteria are met). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, toxicity bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Significant reduction of survival of test organism relative to the control (alpha < 0.05) and test organism survival is 20% less than the control survival. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 3/19/2002. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74939 |
Region 3 |
Pismo 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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. 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. The single sample did not exceed the Evaluation Guideline (MacDonald et al. 2000) as it applies to aquatic life beneficial uses. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17810 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for zinc is 459 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 17794 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP_SWAMP Monitoring (03SW3001) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: SWAMP Toxicity Data 2001-06 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In fresh water sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity) for zinc is 459 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment effect concentrations for polychlorinated biphenyls. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 19(5): 1403-1413 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 4/1/2004. SWAMP toxicity monitoring includes both water samples (collected in both winter and summer) and sediment samples (collected in spring). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
80977 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | pH |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants in sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
Eighteen lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Six beneficial uses are assessed. Zero of the 106 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Agriculture, Drinking Water and Recreation. Three of the 106 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitats. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 106 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Agriculture, Drinking Water and Recreation and three of the 106 samples exceed the water quality objectives for Cold and Warm Freshwater Habitats. These do 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 this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10754 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10756 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50981 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Region Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10790 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10736 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts which adversely affect the agricultural beneficial use. Interpretation of adverse effect shall be as derived from the University of California Agricultural Extension Service guidelines provided in Table 3-3 (Central Coast Waterboard Basin Plan, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland and Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). In Table 3-3 of the Basin Plan (page III-8), water quality guidelines state that severe problems may occur when pH is greater than 8.4 or less than 6.5 in irrigation supply water. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10752 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10791 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51010 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5 (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10753 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10792 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Section II.A.2. Municipal and Domestic Supply Objectives, Section II.A.2.a states the following: The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51026 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.3 (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10809 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50958 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3 (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10755 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 59 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 59 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for non-contact water recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10810 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, General Objective, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 General Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries states the following: For waters not mentioned by a specific beneficial use, the pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50956 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3 (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50983 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 40 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH value shall not be depressed below 7.0 or raised above 8.5 (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 10793 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin objective for water contact recreation uses (Section II.A.2. Objectives for All Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries, II.A.2.a) states the following: pH value shall neither be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.3. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/5/2006. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74717 |
Region 3 |
Pismo Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Turbidity |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2023 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA 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.
Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Nineteen of the 92 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for Cold Freshwater Habitat (Sigler et al. 1984) and 13 of the 92 samples exceed the Warm Freshwater Habitat evaluation guideline (Shoup, D.E. and Wahl D.H., 2009), both used to interpret the water quality objective for turbidity. 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Nineteen of the 92 samples exceed the evaluation guideline for Cold Freshwater Habitat 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12555 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 51 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 51 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12569 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 51 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Coastal Confluences (CC) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 51 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 4/24/2001-12/20/2006. CCAMP Coastal confluence monitoring is conducted monthly (with the exception of April 2003 - December 2003) and is ongoing. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12605 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/30/2001. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 50984 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 10 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 10 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Turbidities of 40 NTU or greater can cause a reduction in piscivorous fish (largemouth bass) growth due to interference with their ability to find food (Shoup, D.E. and Wahl D.H., 2009). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | The Effects of Turbidity on Prey Selection by Piscivorous Largemouth Bass | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 12606 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Regional Board Staff assessed CCAMP Diurnal Dissolved Oxygen Sampling (DO) data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file1 | ||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file2 | |||||
Final Data File used for assessment: CCAMP Water Quality Data_file3 | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - Central Coast Region (Region 3) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Sigler et al. (1984) states that turbidities of 25 NTU's or greater caused reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 7/3/2001-8/30/2001. Diurnal monitoring conducted in summer months at all CCAMP monitoring sites. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might effect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 51011 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 16 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Central Coast Water Board Staff assessed public submissions data for Pismo Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 16 of 38 samples exceed the criterion for Turbidity(NTU). | ||||
Data Reference: | Coastal Confluences field data 2007-2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. (Basin Plan) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Westside San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, 2004-2009. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Turbidities of 25 NTU or greater can cause a reduction in juvenile salmonid growth due to interference with their ability to find food (Sigler et al. 1984). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Effects of chronic turbidity on density and growth of steelheads and coho salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 113:142-150 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Pismo Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ 310PIS-Pismo Creek above Highway 101] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/18/2007-6/22/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Central Coast Water Board Staff are not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). All data are flagged as appropriate. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||