| Water Body Name: | Oak Spring Canyon |
| Water Body ID: | CAR9071200020190614045762 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
114847 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 |
| 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: | 139564 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Alkalinity as CaCO3. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The CCC of 20mg/L is a minimum value except where alkalinity is naturally lower, in which case the criterion cannot be lower than 25% of the natural level (USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
127778 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| 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: | 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: | 184925 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Total Ammonia criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 30-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is Temperature and pH dependent, and was calculated according to the formula listed in the Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 document. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
115579 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) |
| 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: | 185442 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia (Unionized) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ammonia as N, Unionized. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The discharge of wastes shall not cause concentrations of un-ionized ammonia (NH3) to exceed 0.025 mg/l (as N) in inland surface waters, enclosed bays and estuaries and coastal lagoons (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
126078 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| 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: | Benthic Community Effects are being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, additional lines of evidence (LOEs) associating the Benthic Community Effects decision with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants other than benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment or habitat assessment LOEs are necessary to place a water body on the 303(d) List for Benthic Community Effects. One line(s) of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data is/are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. Zero of One benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. The CSCI does not meet QA requirements for assessment. However, a minimum of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples are needed to assess listing status. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this waterbody 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. Zero of one benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. The available information is insufficient to determine whether the waterbody/pollutant combination should be placed on the 303(d) List of impaired waters at this time. 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 215630 | ||||
| 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: | Water Board staff assessed data for 907NP9OSD to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.6526 to 0.6526 . | ||||
| Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index Scores for the 2020 Integrated Report | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration, or other appropriate methods as specified by the Regional Board. Region 9 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego 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 (Rhen, 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: | Samples were collected from station 907NP9OSD | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 4/19/2016 to 4/19/2016. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data collected following SWAMP QA protocols. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
125616 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Chloride |
| 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: | 215124 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for chloride. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Chloride objective in this HSA is 400 mg/L, and this concentration is not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time during any one year period (Basin Plan, Table 3-2). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on 4/19/2016 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
127527 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen |
| 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: | 144315 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrogen, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus, by themselves or in combination with other nutrients, shall be maintained at levels below those which stimulate algae and emergent plant growth. A desired goal in order to prevent plant nuisance in streams and other flowing waters appears to be 0.1 mg/L total P. Analogous threshold values have not been set for nitrogen compounds; however, natural ratios of nitrogen to phosphorus are to be determined by surveillance and monitoring and upheld. If data are lacking, a ratio of N:P = 10:1, on a weight to weight basis shall be used (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
114843 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| 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: | 144646 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved oxygen levels shall not be less than 5.0 mg/l in inland surface waters with the WARM beneficial use designated (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
114845 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Phosphorus |
| 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: | 145665 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phosphorus as P. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus, by themselves or in combination with other nutrients, shall be maintained at levels below those which stimulate algae and emergent plant growth. A desired goal in order to prevent plant nuisance in streams and other flowing waters appears to be 0.1 mg/L total P. Analogous threshold values have not been set for nitrogen compounds; however, natural ratios of nitrogen to phosphorus are to be determined by surveillance and monitoring and upheld. If data are lacking, a ratio of N:P = 10:1, on a weight to weight basis shall be used (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
114846 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity |
| 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: | 147477 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Turbidity. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Turbidity water quality threshold in this HSA is 20 NTU, and this level is not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time during any one year period (Basin Plan, Table 3-2). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
114844 |
Region 9 |
Oak Spring Canyon |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| 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: | 145354 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater 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 SWAMP RWB9 Monitoring data for Oak Spring Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Field, Habitat, Sediment, Tissue, Water data for the 2020/2022 integrated report in Region 9. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | In inland surface waters the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (907NP9OSD) | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-04-19 and 2016-04-19 | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPrP 2008, Nagoda and Busse, 2013. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Screening of Cyanotoxins in Lakes/Reservoirs and Coastal Wetlands in the San Diego Region, SWAMP QAPrP 2017 | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program | ||||