Draft California 2020 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 9 - San Diego Region

Water Body Name: Aliso Creek (mouth)
Water Body ID: CAE9011300019990208095945
Water Body Type: Estuary
 
DECISION ID
94723
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the six samples exceed the OBJECTIVE.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 six samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE 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 sixteen 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 94723, Arsenic
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72978
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 6
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the six samples exceed the criteria for arsenic.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The CTR for arsenic is 150 ug/L.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81898
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81898, Cadmium
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72980
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for cadmium.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81899
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81899, Chromium
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72981
 
Pollutant: Chromium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for chromium.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81900
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a since line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81900, Copper
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72982
 
Pollutant: Copper
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for copper.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected fromat Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May, October and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81953
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceeds the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceeds the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81953, Lead
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72983
 
Pollutant: Lead
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for lead.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81954
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
Pollutant: Nickel
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81954, Nickel
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72984
 
Pollutant: Nickel
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for nickel.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81955
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
Pollutant: Selenium
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of 6 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. One of 6 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81955, Selenium
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72985
 
Pollutant: Selenium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Marine Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 6
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: One of the six samples exceeded the criterion for selenium.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: California's Ocean Plan Table B lists 6-month median concentration of 15 ug/L to protect aquatic life in marine waters.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81956
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81956, Silver
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72986
 
Pollutant: Silver
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for silver.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion maximum concentrations for silver to protect aquatic life in freshwater (1-hour average). The dissolved silver criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
81167
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 8 samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 8 samples exceed the water quality objective 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.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 81167, Zinc
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 72987
 
Pollutant: Zinc
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 8
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: None of the eight samples exceed the hardness adjusted criteria for zinc.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Inland surface waters, enclosed bays, and estuaries shall not contain toxic pollutants in excess of the numerical objectives applicable to California specified in 40 CFR 131.36 (section 131.36 revised at 57 FR 60848, December 22, 1992).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used.
Guideline Reference: Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected from Pacific Ocean Shoreline, Aliso HSA, at Aliso Creek mouth (stations ACM-1 and ACM-1d).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected from station, ACM-1 on September and December of 2006 and January of 2008. Samples were collected from station, ACM-1d in October 2007, May and December 2008, and April of 2009.
Environmental Conditions: Approximately 38% of the samples were collected after a storm event.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
95760
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Sources: A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2027
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. With the latest data, three of three samples exceed the toxicity criteria.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. With the latest data, three of three samples exceed the criteria for toxicity, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 95760, Toxicity
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 95675
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Marine Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: TOXICITY TESTING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Six samples were collected to test for toxicity. Three of the nine samples exhibited statistically and biologically significant toxicity. The toxicity tests that exhibited significant toxicity included Mysid biomass and survival and Purple Urchin development and fertilization.
Data Reference: Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. Additionally, the biological significance of the sample was evaluated by determining whether the sample response was lower than the evaluation threshold.
Guideline Reference: Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-821-R-02-013
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at station ACM1 in the ocean close to Aliso Creek Mouth.
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected from September 2006 to January 2008.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: The data collected under the Quality Assurance Management Plan for The Orange County Stormwater Program. The SWAMP measurement quality objectives were followed for toxicity data. The performance of toxicity bioassays and evaluation of reference toxicants were performed using USEPA and Standard Methods.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
70046
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
Pollutant: Indicator Bacteria
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Sources: A Source Unknown
TMDL Name: Bacteria Impaired Waters I (creeks and beach shorelines)
TMDL Project Code: 169
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: 06/22/2011
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70046, Indicator Bacteria
Region 9     
Aliso Creek (mouth)
 
LOE ID: 4443
 
Pollutant: Indicator Bacteria
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Not Recorded
 
Beneficial Use: Water Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PATHOGEN MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006.
Data Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Unspecified
Objective/Criterion Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Unspecified
Guideline Reference: Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d)
 
Spatial Representation: Unspecified
Temporal Representation: Unspecified
Environmental Conditions: Unspecified
QAPP Information: Unspecified
QAPP Information Reference(s):