| Water Body Name: | Cold Creek (Los Angeles County) |
| Water Body ID: | CAR4042100020020130153315 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
98334 |
Region 4 |
Cold Creek (Los Angeles County) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating the Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants is necessary to assess listing status. Two of the seven samples collected had IBI scores below 40 but there are no impairments for associated pollutant.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this water segment on the 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. Two of the seven samples collected had IBI scores below 40 however, as required under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy, pollutant(s) could not be directly associated with the Benthic Community Effects. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. 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: | The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 83700 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of the seven samples collected had IBI scores below 40. The samples were collected at three different sites. The scores were, 47 (fall 2006) and 59 (spring 2009) for site CC11; 31 (fall 2006) and 27 (spring 2009) for site CC2; and 73 (fall 2006), 74 (spring 2008) and 79 (spring 2009) for site CC3. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for abundance calculations, taxa list and IBI scores in Malibu Creek Watershed, 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 or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board. Region 4 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, vol. 16, No. 6, pp 1322¿1329 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at station CC11 Cold Creek Middle. Cold Canyon Road, CC2 Cold Creek, Piuma Rd. at the Backbone Trail, and CC3 Cold Creek, Stunt Rd. at Cold Creek Preserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in the fall 2006, and the spring of 2008 and 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with California Stream Bioassessment Procedure. Collection procedures were audited by California Department of Fish and Game in 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 83703 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Three samples were collected from Cold Creek over three years. The three samples collected had IBI scores above 40. The scores were 53 (2006), 52 (2007), and 55 (2008). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Bioassessment Monitoring Report in Los Angeles County, 2006-2008. | ||||
| 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 or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of a Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) for Wadeable Streams in Northern Coastal California and its Application to Regional 305(b) Assessment | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from Cold Creek station number 17. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2006, 2007 and 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Qaulity assurance is good. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) contracted Weston Solutions, Inc. to perform biological assessments. Sampling and analysis followed the protocols described in the California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP) (Harrington, 2003), and also incorporated the Southern California Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) (Ode et al., 2005). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
76871 |
Region 4 |
Cold Creek (Los Angeles County) |
||
| Pollutant: | Invasive Species |
| 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: | Pollution |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.10 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.10, waters are listed when a declining trend in water quality is substantiated.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 2 sites showed an increase in density of mud snails over the three years of sampling (2006, 2007, 2008) and 0 out of 4 sites sampled showed medium or high densities of mud snail in 2008. One site exhibited a low density of mudsnails in 2008. At high numbers, mud snails can completely cover a stream bed and damage local stream ecosystems. The colonies outcompete native aquatic invertebrates that the watershed¿s fish and amphibians rely on for food, disrupting the entire food web. In Cold Creek the mudsnails have not reached high densities. Benthic macroinvertebrates as measured by Southern California IBI (index of biological integrity) in Cold Creek were poor or good in 2005 indicating impairment of benthic community structure. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Data was collected over a three years time frame and a baseline condition of zero abundance of the invasive species was used. 3. Zero of two sites showed an increase in density of mud snails over a three years of sampling and zero of four sites sampled showed medium or high densities of mud snail in 2008. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 28707 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Invasive Species | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wetland Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A total of zero of two sites showed an increase in density of mud snails over the three years of sampling (2006, 2007, 2008) and zero of four sites sampled showed medium or high densities of mud snail in 2008. | ||||
| Data Reference: | New Zealand Mudsnail Surveys July 2006, July 2007 and October 2008 Santa Monica Mountains. Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission / Santa Monica Baykeeper. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan states that: "All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board.¿ | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Presence of high densities and increasing densities. While quantitative and predictive research continues, due to its ability to attain extremely high densities, the impacts of the mudsnails on aquatic ecosystems where it occurs in the western U.S. are large and include: decreased densities of native macroinvertebrates and reduced food resources; decreased whole-stream algal production; poor food source in that mudsnails are much more difficult to digest, with their hard shells and operculum than are the thin-shelled, native pulmonate snails that do not have opercula or than soft-bodied, aquatic insect larvae. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | The New Zealand Mudsnail Invades the Western United States. Aquatic Nuisance Species Digest Volume 4 No. 4. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four sites were sampled in the following locations in Cold Creek: Stunt Rd. at the lower gated entrance in Cold Creek Reserve; the public access off Stunt Rd. DS of lower entrance; Cold Canyon Rd. M.M. 1.36 Cold Creek Midway D; and Piuma Rd and Crater Camp Rd at the Backbone Trail. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The Stunt Road and Cold Canyon Road sites were sampled in July of 2006, July of 2007 and October of 2008. The other three sites were sampled in July of 2007 and October of 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected as detailed in the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission and Santa Monica Baykeeper New Zealand Mudsnail Surveys. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | New Zealand Mudsnail Surveys July 2006, July 2007 and October 2008 Santa Monica Mountains. Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission / Santa Monica Baykeeper. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 30173 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Invasive Species | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Spawning | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wetland Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two sites sampled in 2005 IBI scores were calculated at 27, category ¿poor¿ and 60, category ¿good¿ | ||||
| Data Reference: | Malibu Bioassessment Winter 2005 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan states that: "All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board.¿ | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked as very good (80-100), good (60-79), fair (40-49), poor (20-39) and very poor (0-19) habitat conditions. Sites with scores below 39 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams. Appendix 7-B Environmental Management Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 493-504. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Two sites in Cold Creek were sampled, CC2 and CC3. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Sites were sampled in winter of 2005. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Benthic macroinvertebrate populations and IBI scores may also be affected by a wide range of anthropogenic stressors. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with California Stream Bioassessment Procedure. Collection procedures were audited by California Department of Fish and Game in 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (Protocol Brief for Biological and Physical/Habitat Assessment in Wadeable Streams) California Department of Fish and Game Water Pollution Control Laboratory Aquatic Bioassessment Laboratory Revision Date - December, 2003 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Stream Bioassessment Procedure Biological and Physical Habitat Field Audit | ||||
DECISION ID |
94346 |
Region 4 |
Cold Creek (Los Angeles County) |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 9 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for 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. 0 of 9 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 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: | 83704 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 9 minimums of Dissolved Oxygen concentrations had no exceedences. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nuisance, Nutrients, Other Inorganics, and Salinity in Various Region 4 Water Bodies, 2006-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved Oxygen Water Quality Objective of all surface waters designated as Warm Fresh Water Aquatic Habitat shall not be depressed below 5 mg/l. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the J_LCOLDCRK and J_UCOLDCRK stations. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately twice a year from August 2006 to November 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | NPDES quality assurance. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70914 |
Region 4 |
Cold Creek (Los Angeles County) |
||
| Pollutant: | Sulfates |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. An insufficient total number of samples were taken and an insufficient number of samples exceed the MCL guideline for Sulfate. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1.The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2.The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3.Two of two samples exceeded the MCL guidelineand this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. 4.Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2256 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of 2 samples exceeding the MCL guideline (SWAMP, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | CCR- Title 22 Table 64449-B Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels for sulfate of 250 mg/l. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | One sampling station at Malibu Creek 34.0429 -118.6842. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected March 2003 through March 2004. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Malibu Creek Watershed: 404.21. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP Quality Assurance Plan. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94347 |
Region 4 |
Cold Creek (Los Angeles County) |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 7 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for 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. 0 of 7 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 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 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: | 83705 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 7 minimums and maximums had no exceedences. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Metals, Nuisance, Nutrients, Other Inorganics, and Salinity in Various Region 4 Water Bodies, 2006-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH of all inland surface waters shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the J_LCOLDCRK and J_UCOLDCRK stations. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately twice per semi-annual period from August 2006 to November 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | NPDES quality assurance. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||