Water Body Name: | Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
Water Body ID: | CAR9091200020111216093712 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
83876 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | 2-Methylnaphthalene |
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78373 | ||||
Pollutant: | 2-Methylnaphthalene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for 2-Methylnaphthalene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for 2-Methylnaphthalene is 201.28 ng/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
83921 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | Antimony |
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78374 | ||||
Pollutant: | Antimony | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Antimony. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Antimony is 25 ug/g dry weight (Long and Morgan, 1990). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
83922 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78375 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Arsenic is 70 ug/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
83966 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78376 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Benzo(a)anthracene is 692.53 ng/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
83967 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78377 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Cadmium is 4.21 ng/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
100641 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | Chlordane |
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78378 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Total Chlordane is 6 ng/g dry weight (Long and Morgan, 1990). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the National Status of Trends Program. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 52. Seattle, WA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84008 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78379 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Chromium is 370 ug/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84053 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78380 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Chrysene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Chrysene is 845.98 ng/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84300 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78381 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Copper is 270 ug/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84302 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | Dibenz[a,h]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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78382 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Dibenzo(a, h)anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Dibenzo(a, h)anthracene is 260 ng/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84344 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78383 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the sediment quality guideline (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Endrin is 0.76 ug/g oc (Fairey et al., 2001). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Technical basis for deriving sediment criteria for nonionic organic contaminants for the protection of benthic organisms by using equilibrium partitioning. EPA822-R-93-011. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84185 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
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 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Enterococcus Zero of five samples exceed the single sample objective for water contact recreation. Fecal coliform Zero of five samples exceed the single sample objective for water contact recreation and non-contact recreation. Total coliform Zero of 5 samples exceed the single sample objective for water contact recreation. 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. Samples and exceedences are as follows: Enterococcus Zero of five samples exceed the single sample objective for water contact recreation. Fecal coliform Zero of five samples exceed the single sample objective for water contact recreation and non-contact recreation. Total coliform Zero of 5 samples exceed the single sample objective for water contact recreation. 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.1 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: | 76854 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxicsubstances in concentrations which are toxic to,or which produce detrimental physiologicalresponses in human, plant, animal, or indigenousaquatic life (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In waters designated for water contact recreation (REC I), the total coliform concentration shall not exceed 10000 MPN/100 ml (CDPH 2006). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 77040 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | In waters designated for water contact recreation (REC I), the fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed 400 MPN/100 ml. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 77039 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | In waters designated for non contact recreation (REC 2), the fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed 4000 MPN/100 ml (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 77023 | ||||
Pollutant: | Enterococcus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Enterococci. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Samples shall not exceed 61 organisms per 100 ml for enterococcus in waters designated for REC I beneficial use (Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River, Sweetwater River] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84347 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78384 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Lead. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Lead is 112.18 ug/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
83696 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78385 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, Gamma. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the sediment quality guideline (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for HCH, gamma(Lindane; BHC, gamma) is 0.37 ug/g oc (Fairey et al., 2001). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | An evaluation of methods for calculating mean sediment quality guideline quotients as indicators of contamination and acute toxicity to amphipods by chemical mixtures. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 20(10): 2276-2286 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
100643 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78386 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the sediment quality guideline (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Mercury is 2.1 ug/g (PTI Environmental Services, 1991). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Pollutants of concern in Puget Sound. EPA 910/9-91-003. Seattle, WA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
83878 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines for high molecular weight PAHs, low molecular weight PAHs, and total PAHs. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78388 | ||||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for PAH, Low molecular weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Low molecular weight PAHs is 1442 ng/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 78389 | ||||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the sediment quality guideline (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Total PAHs is 1800 ug/g (Fairey et al., 2001). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | An evaluation of methods for calculating mean sediment quality guideline quotients as indicators of contamination and acute toxicity to amphipods by chemical mixtures. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 20(10): 2276-2286 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 78387 | ||||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for PAH, High molecular weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for High molecular weight PAHs is 9600 ng/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
100638 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guideline. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78390 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the sediment quality guideline (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Total PCBs is 400 ng/g (MacDonald et al., 2000b). | ||||
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 Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84100 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78391 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Phenanthrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Phenanthrene is 543.53 ng/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84101 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78392 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Pyrene is 1397.4 ng/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
84144 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
Pollutant: | Silver |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78371 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Silver. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the probable effect level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Silver is 1.77 ug/g dry weight (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||
DECISION ID |
100642 |
Region 9 |
Sweetwater Flood Control Channel |
||
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 sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of five samples exceed the sediment guidelines. 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. Zero of the five samples exceed the guideline 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: | 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: | 78372 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Bight data for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants from Bight, 2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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 for the San Diego Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In marine and estuarine sediments the effects range median (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Zinc is 410 ug/g dry weight (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Incidence of adverse biological effects within ranges of chemical concentrations in marine and estuary sediments. Environmental Management. 19, (1): 81-97 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Sweetwater Flood Control Channel was collected at 5 monitoring sites [ 909_6052, 909_6057, 909_6060, 909_6065, 909_6069] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 7/10/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Southern California Bight. | ||||