Water Body Name: | Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
Water Body ID: | CAO3080001020090612085224 |
Water Body Type: | Ocean |
DECISION ID |
129266 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Ammonia |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 (LOE) is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The following is a summary of the sample and exceedances for each beneficial use: Based on LOEs summarizing total ammonia data (‘nitrogen, ammonia’ and ‘nitrogen as ammonia’) zero of the two samples exceed the California EPA's Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan) Criteria set to protect aquatic life in the marine habitat. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This sample size is insufficient to determine an applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. In accordance with Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, a minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the samples exceed the water quality objectives and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. 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: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219155 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 600 ug/L for Ammonia (as nitrogen) to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126648 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Arsenic |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
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: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219165 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 8 ug/L for total Arsenic to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
113819 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, and single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the seven water samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect for aquatic life beneficial uses. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. 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. 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 seven water samples exceed the evaluation guideline applied to protect for each aquatic life beneficial use and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 159315 | ||||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB3 CCLEAN data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Bifenthrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Tissue, Water or the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The genus mean acute value for a mysid (Mysidopsis bahia) is 0.00397 ug/L (DFG 00-6, 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Criteria for Pyrethroid Insecticides (DFG Administrative Report 00-6, 2000) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CarmRiv1) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-09-21 and 2016-09-21 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Applied Marine Sciences. 2019. Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219166 | ||||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Bifenthrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall reach concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The genus mean acute value for a mysid (Mysidopsis bahia) is 0.00397 ug/L (DFG 00-6, 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Criteria for Pyrethroid Insecticides (DFG Administrative Report 00-6, 2000) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126649 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Cadmium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support ratings are set to 'insufficient information'. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
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: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219171 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Cadmium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 1 ug/L for total Cadmium to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126650 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (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. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of three samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of three samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219176 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 3 ug/L for total Copper to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
130787 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Enterococcus |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters (Ocean Plan) contains two bacteria water quality objectives applicable to the REC-1 beneficial use: a fecal coliform water quality objective and an enterococci water quality objective. This waterbody is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy, as applicable, using the enterococci objectives. In accordance with section 6.1.5.3 of the Listing Policy, data should be representative of the critical timing that the pollutant is expected to impact the waterbody. Indicator bacteria (total coliform, fecal coliform, E. coli, enterococci) populations may fluctuate substantially on a daily, seasonal, or yearly basis. Lacking constant inputs, they do not persist in the environment for a long period and effects are of relatively short duration. As a result, the historic levels of indicator bacteria in the waterbody may be a poor indicator of current risks to human health, particularly when more recent data are available to sufficiently assess the water quality standard. Additionally, water quality conditions in waterbodies may change as a result of management actions that have been implemented to address bacteria. Unrepresentative data may result in incorrectly placing or not placing a water body segment on the list, which could result in the unnecessary expenditure of public resources or missing a human health problem. For enterococci data, Listing Policy section 3.3 instructs to use the binomial distribution table in section, as applicable. To use the binomial table that uses a four percent exceedance frequency, the data must be collected from coastal beaches from April 1 through October 31 only. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of 3 of the 4 samples collected since 2010 exceed the STV water quality objective (LOE 219216). There is no QAPP associated with this data and this data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded. 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. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used does not satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy, because this data was not received with QAPP and is therefore assessed as ancillary evidence only. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. A total of 3 of the 4 samples collected since 2010 exceed the STV water quality objective (see LOE 219216) and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Additionally, this LOEs is considered ancillary evidence and will not be the sole information for making a decision. 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: | One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of 3 of the 4 samples collected since 2010 exceed the STV water quality objective (LOE 219216). There is no QAPP associated with this data and this data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded. 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. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used does not satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy, because this data was not received with QAPP and is therefore assessed as ancillary evidence only. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. A total of 3 of the 4 samples collected since 2010 exceed the STV water quality objective (see LOE 219216) and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Additionally, this LOEs is considered ancillary evidence and will not be the sole information for making a decision. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219216 | ||||
Pollutant: | Enterococcus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 3 of the 4 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for Enterococcus. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Ocean Plan (SWRCB 2019) states that the bacteria water quality objective to protect the REC-1 beneficial for all ocean waters for Enterococci is a statistical value threshold (STV) of 110 cfu/100 mL. The STV shall not be exceeded by more than 10 percent of the samples collected in a calendar month, calculated in a static manner. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 203PEB010-REC | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2014-02-25 and 2016-03-06 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
130220 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the eight samples exceed the water quality objective for contact recreation. 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 supported and a minimum of five exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.2. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the eight samples exceed the water quality objective for non-contact recreation and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the CWA 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: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219212 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 8 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Coliform, Fecal. The water quality threshold is based on a Single Sample Maximum (SSM) value that is calculated daily. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Ocean Plan (SWRCB 2019) states that the Single Sample Maximum fecal coliform density not exceed 400 per 100 mL. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 203PEB010-REC | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2014-02-25 and 2016-03-06 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126651 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219183 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Shellfish Harvesting | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fluoranthene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 30-day average concentration of 15 ug/L for Fluoranthene to protect human health in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-03-06 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219181 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fluoranthene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 30-day average concentration of 15 ug/L for Fluoranthene to protect human health in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-03-06 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126652 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Lead |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 at least one 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 3 total lead samples exceed the water quality objective aquatic life beneficial uses. 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 supported and a minimum of two exceedances is needed to determine if beneficial uses are not supported using table 3.1. Therefore, the use support rating is set to 'insufficient information'. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the samples exceed the evaluation guidelines and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219189 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Lead. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 2 ug/L for total Lead to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
130743 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Mercury |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) List under section 3.1 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 LOE summarizes water samples: - Zero of two water samples exceed the mercury evaluation guideline (Ocean Plan), set to protect for marine habitat beneficial uses. 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. 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. No water samples exceeded the evaluation guidelines, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) List. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219197 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Mercury. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 0.04 ug/L for total Mercury to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-07 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126653 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Nickel |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (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. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of three samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of three samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219203 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nickel. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 5 ug/L for total Nickel to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-26 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
113814 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 150969 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB3 CCLEAN data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls). Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of California Mussel each composed of 45 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Tissue, Water or the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in shellfish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): CarmRiv1. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2007-03-18 and 2007-03-18. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Applied Marine Sciences. 2019. Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 150971 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Shellfish | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Shellfish Harvesting | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB3 CCLEAN data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls). Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of California Mussel each composed of 45 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Tissue, Water or the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Central Coast Basin, Chapter III, Section II.A.2 Objectives for all Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays and Estuaries). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in shellfish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 21 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. (Brodberg, R.K., and G.A. Pollock, 1999; Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): CarmRiv1. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2007-03-18 and 2007-03-18. When composited fish were collected over multiple days, the first day of fish collection was used as the sample date in the LOE, both for LOE writing, and for averaging period purposes. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Applied Marine Sciences. 2019. Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network | ||||
DECISION ID |
113821 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Permethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 176947 | ||||
Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB3 CCLEAN data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Permethrin. Although a total of 2 samples were collected, 2 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Tissue, Water or the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The interim criteria maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in saline water is 0.001 ug/L (DFG 00-6, 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Criteria for Pyrethroid Insecticides (DFG Administrative Report 00-6, 2000) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (CarmRiv1). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2016-09-21 to 2017-03-01 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Applied Marine Sciences. 2019. Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Central Coast Long-Term Environmental Assessment Network | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219207 | ||||
Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Permethrin. Although a total of 9 samples were collected, 9 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The interim criteria maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in saline water is 0.001 ug/L (DFG 00-6, 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Criteria for Pyrethroid Insecticides (DFG Administrative Report 00-6, 2000) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Date for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2014-02-26 to 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126654 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Selenium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (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. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219140 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Selenium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 15 ug/L for total Selenium to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-04-07 and 2016-03-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126655 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Silver |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (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. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219145 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Silver. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 0.7 ug/L for total Silver to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-02-07 and 2016-03-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
126656 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the Clean Water Act (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. A total of one line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. These data are insufficient to determine the applicable beneficial use support rating with the power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed 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. A total of zero of two samples exceed the water quality objective for the marine habitat beneficial use. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 219150 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Ancillary Line of Evidence | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Habitat, Sediment, Toxicity, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 3 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 6-month median concentration of 20 ug/L for total Zinc to protect aquatic life in marine waters. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (203PEB010-REC) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2015-02-07 and 2016-03-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No QAPP Received. Data will be assessed as ancillary evidence. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | The data included in this LOE does not have a QAPP, but was collected after the QAPP requirements had been developed, and thus was assessed as an ancillary line of evidence. | ||||
DECISION ID |
76380 |
Region 3 |
Pacific Ocean (Point Pinos to Point Sur) |
||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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.
A single line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 20 samples exceed the OEHHA screening value for Shellfish Harvesting. 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. One of the 20 samples exceed the OEHHA screening value for Shellfish Harvesting and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 30098 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Shellfish Harvesting | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Resident mussles (composites (40-50 individuals) of resident Mytilus californianus) were collected by CCLEAN staff twice a year in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 at two sample locations. One of the 20 composite samples exceeded the OEHHA screening value for shellfish. | ||||
Data Reference: | Final Data CCLEAN Mussel Tissue and Solid Phase Extraction data | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | OEHHA Screening value for the protection of human health from the consumption of fish and shellfish. Brodberg and Pollock calculated "California Lakes Screening Values" for a 70 kg adult human and based on a fish consumption value of 21 g/day (1999). OEHHA Screening Value in fish and shellfish tissue for Dieldrin is 2.0 ug/Kg. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Mussles were collected from two coastal locations: Rock outcrop adjacent to Carmel River Mouth (Ocean View Avenue in Carmel, where it ends at Scenic Road) and rock outcrop at Fanshell overlook (just west of the intersection of Spyglass Hill Road and 17Mile Drive). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected twice a year in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | CCLEAN has an approved QAPP | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||