| Water Body Name: | San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 (Yucaipa Creek to Headwaters) |
| Water Body ID: | CAR8015200020011107145736 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
74117 |
Region 8 |
San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 (Yucaipa Creek to Headwaters) |
||
| Pollutant: | 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol | 2,4-Dichlorophenol | 2,4-Dinitrophenol | 2,4-Dinitrotoluene | 2,6-Dinitrotoluene | 2-Chloronaphthalene | 2-Nitrophenol | 4-Nitrophenol | Acenaphthene | Aldrin | Butyl benzyl phthalate | Carbon Disulfide | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chloroform | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | Dichlorobenzenes | Dieldrin | Diethyl phthalate | Endosulfan | Endrin | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Hexachlorobutadiene | Hexachlorocyclopentadiene | Hexachloroethane | Methoxychlor | Naphthalene | Nitrobenzene | Pentachlorophenol (PCP) | Phenol | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toxaphene |
| 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: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of ten samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule or the US EPA National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Toxicity Information Lowest Observed Affect Acute Level 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 are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. 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: | 5740 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol | 2,4-Dichlorophenol | 2,4-Dinitrophenol | 2,4-Dinitrotoluene | 2,6-Dinitrotoluene | 2-Chloronaphthalene | 2-Nitrophenol | 4-Nitrophenol | Acenaphthene | Aldrin | Butyl benzyl phthalate | Carbon Disulfide | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chloroform | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | Dichlorobenzenes | Dieldrin | Diethyl phthalate | Endosulfan | Endrin | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Hexachlorobutadiene | Hexachlorocyclopentadiene | Hexachloroethane | Methoxychlor | Naphthalene | Nitrobenzene | Pentachlorophenol (PCP) | Phenol | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toxaphene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 10 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Ten samples were collected at one station, A, as follows: 10/2001, 1/2002, 4/2002, 7/2002, 4/2004, 1/2005, 4/2005, 11/2005, 1/2006, 4/2006 and none exceeded the guidelines. | ||||
| Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | US EPA National Water Quality Aquatic Toxicity Information Lowest Observed Affect Acute:Acenapthene 520 ug/l, butylbenzylphthalate 940 ug/l, bis (2-chloroethyl)ether 238,000 ug/l, bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether 238,000 ug/l, 4-bromphenyl phenyl ether 360 ug/l, carbon disulfide 50,000 ug/l, 2-chloronaphthalene 1,600 ug/l, 2,4-dichlorophenol 2,200 ug/l, 2,4-dichlorophenol 330 ug/l, diethyl phthalate 940 ug/l, di-n-octyl phthalate 940 ug/l, 2,4-dinitrophenol 330 ug/l, 2,4- dinitrotoluene 330 ug/l, 2,6-dinitrotoluene 330 ug/l, hexachlorobenzene 250 ug/l, hexachlorobutadiene 90 ug/l, hexachlorocyclopentadiene 7 ug/l, hexachloroethane 980 ug/l, nitrobenzene 27,000 ug/l, 2-nitrophenol 230 ug/l, 4-nitrophenol 230 ug/l, phenol 10,200 ug/l, 2,4,5-trichlorobenzene 11,000 ug/l, 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 250 ug/l; US EPA National Water Quality Aquatic Toxicity Information Lowest Observed Effect Chronic: butylbenzylphthalate 3 ug/l, bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 122 ug/l, bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether 122 ug/l, carbon disulfide 50,000 ug/l, chloroform 1,240 ug/l, 1,2-dichlorobenzene 763 ug/l, 1,2-dichloropropane, 5,700 ug/l, diethyl phthalate 3 ug/l, di-n-octyl phthalate 3 ug/l, 2,4-dinitrophenol 230 ug/l, 2,4-dinitrotoluene 230 ug/l, 1,2,6-dinitrotoluene 230 ug/l, naphthalene 620 ug/l, 1,1,2,2-tetrachloroethane 2,400 ug/l, tetrachloroethylene 840 ug/l, 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene 50 ug/l, 1,1,2-trichloroethane 9,400 ug/l, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 970 ug/l;US EPA National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Toxicity:chlorobenzene 680 ug/l, endosulfan 4-day avg. total 0.056 ug/l, heptachlorepoxide instantaneous maximum 0.52 ug/l, methoxychlor instantaneous maximum 0.03 ug/l; California Toxics Rule-aquatic life: Aldrin 3 ug/l, DDT instantaneous maximum 1.1 ug/l, dieldrin 4-day avg. 0.056 ug/l and 1-hr avg. 0.24 ug/l. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The 10 samples were collected at one station, station A | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Ten samples were collected at one station, A, as follows: 10/2001, 1/2002, 4/2002, 7/2002, 4/2004, 1/2005, 4/2005, 11/2005, 1/2006, 4/2006 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The quality assurance of this data is deemed appropriate because it was collected by an NPDES permitted discharger in compliance with its permit's monitoring and reporting program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
98000 |
Region 8 |
San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 (Yucaipa Creek to Headwaters) |
||
| 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 and 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutant(s) is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. One of the 1 benthic macroinvertebrate samples exceed (fall below) the California Streams Condition Index (CSCI) threshold for likely altered biological condition. The water segment does not have associated pollutant(s) samples that exceed water quality objectives. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence provides sufficient justification for not 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. Pursuant to section 3.9 of the Listing Policy, the water segment exhibits significant degradation in biological populations and/or communities as compared to reference site(s) using the California Stream Condition Index. 4. Pursuant to section 3.9 of the Listing Policy, the water segment does not have associated pollutant(s) samples that exceed water quality objectives. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not being met. The California Stream Condition Index is a new scoring tool for bioassessment data that 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 has been used in some assessments this reporting cycle and will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). If CSCI scores have not been calculated for data and only IBI scores are available, IBI scores will still be used to interpret the data. |
| 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 California Stream Condition Index is a new scoring tool for bioassessment data that 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 has been used in some assessments this reporting cycle and will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). If CSCI scores have not been calculated for data and only IBI scores are available, IBI scores will still be used to interpret the data. |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 82328 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One sample was collected during 2006 to assess benthic macroinvertebrates. The CSCI score for this site is 0.60. This site is below the 0.79 threshold and therefore exceeds the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
| Region 8 CSCI scores and data. | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Inland surface water communities and populations, including vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant species, shall not be degraded as a result of the discharge of waste. Degradation is damage to an aquatic community or population with the result that balanced community no longer exists. The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected from station 801STW051 (SMCR8_051). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in June 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for the RWB8's Probabilistic Stream Survey CY2006 following SWAMP protocols and data were stored in the SWAMP database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96102 |
Region 8 |
San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 (Yucaipa Creek to Headwaters) |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status for toxicity, and waters may be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List for toxicity alone.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess water toxicity. Zero of the 1 samples exhibited water toxicity. 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 1 samples exhibited water toxicity 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: | 82333 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One sample was collected to evaluate water toxicity. The one sample did not exhibit significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival and reproduction of Ceriodaphnia dubia. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Toxic substances shall not be discharged at levels that will bioaccumulate in aquatic resources to levels which are harmful to human health. Region 8 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River 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. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms. Fourth Edition. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. EPA-821-R-02-013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected in San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 at this site SMCR8_613. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The data was analyzed by CSULB and follows California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program protocols. No QAPP provided. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97158 |
Region 8 |
San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 (Yucaipa Creek to Headwaters) |
||
| Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
| 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: | 2029 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Four (4) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Twenty-one (21) of 32 samples exceed the E. coli Geomean Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient 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. Twenty-one (21) of the 32 samples exceed the E. coli Geomean, and this does exceed the frequency listed in table 3.2 4. The line of evidence based on the single sample maximum was not included in the Final Use Rating as the Region 8 Basin Plan states that where a representative geometric mean can be calculated, single sample maximum values shall not be used for assessment (page 4-17, footnote 3). 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 82330 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 43 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 30 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirty of the 41 samples exceeded the geometric mean E. coli evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Region 8, 2008-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Santa Ana Region basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Geomean: The E. coli concentration for geometric mean shall not exceed more than 126/100ml. USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from San Timoteo Creek Reach 3 ST2. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a week from July 2008 to November 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected under the Qality Assurance Project Plan for the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Water Quality Assessment Project. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 82331 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 40 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Forty of the 58 samples exceeded the total coliform evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Region 8, 2008-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Santa Ana Region basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample total coliform concentration shall not exceed more than 10000/100ml. Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches (CDPH 2011). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from San Timoteo Creek ST2. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a week from July 2008 to November 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected under the Qality Assurance Project Plan for the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Water Quality Assessment Project. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 82332 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 46 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 46 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Forty-six of the 46 samples exceeded the total coliform evaluation guideline for geometric mean. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Region 8, 2008-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Santa Ana Region basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Geomean: The total coliform concentration for geometric mean shall not exceed more than 1000/100ml. Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches (CDPH 2011). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from San Timoteo Creek ST2. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a week from July 2008 to November 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected under the Qality Assurance Project Plan for the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Water Quality Assessment Project. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 82329 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 58 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 31 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Thirty-one of the 58 samples exceeded the E. coli evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Region 8, 2008-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Santa Ana Region basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample E. coli concentration shall not exceed more than 235/100ml. USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria -1986. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from San Timoteo Creek ST2. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a week from July 2008 to November 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected under the Qality Assurance Project Plan for the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Water Quality Assessment Project. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||