Water Body Name: | Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
Water Body ID: | CAR8012100019990211140353 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
78216 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2023 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | New data were collected but not enough to support a delisting.
2010 Integrated Report US EPA action Default CTR translators were used to evaluate total metals data with dissolved metals criteria since the translators developed for the Use Attainability Analysis in the 1990's were superseded in 2000 by the federal promulgation of the California Toxics Rule. Following the provisions of the State Policy for Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California of 2005, USEPA conversion factors (translators) are to be used to convert total metals criteria to dissolved metals criteria. As a result, LOEs 5337 and 5831 have been replaced during State Board review. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant with the CTR chronic criteria. Twenty-nine samples exceed the CTR criteria. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Twenty-nine of 62 samples exceed the California Toxics Rule chronic criteria and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
The water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5337 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 17 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data obtianed from San Bernardino County Flood Control Storm Water Program. Out of 17 samples collected, 7 exceeded the acute CTR criteria. A total to dissolved ratio was used in converting the data from total to dissolved. this ratio was developed through the Use Attainability Analyses for the Santa Ana River. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | CTR acute criteria varies depending on hardness and ranged from 17 ug/l to 70 ug/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at Hamner in Santa Ana River Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected since 2/17/94 through 2/19/2004 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The data was collected during the wet season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5831 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples collected none exceeded the chronic criteria. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. This data was analyzed using the total to dissolved ratio of 2.6 that was developed through the Use Attainability Analyses for the Santa Ana River. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life acute criteria varies with hardness and ranged from 31 ug/l to 37 ug/l | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The 6 samples were collected at one station at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected starting on 6/8/94 through 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as wet weather grabs. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data was provided by an NPDES discharger in compliance with the permit's monitoring requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31371 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 47 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 29 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Twenty-nine of 47samples exceed the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence replaces LOEs 5337 and 5831. These LOEs have been replaced as a result of the State Board review and revision of the Regional Board assessment of these monitoring data. |
||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for copper. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Site 8 - Santa Ana River, Reach 3 @ Hamner Avenue. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Grab samples were collected during wet weather conditions from 1994 to 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Wet weather sampling are collected at 4 or more intervals during the rainy season (October 15 through April 15). | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31368 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Six samples collected did not exceed the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence replaces LOEs 5337 and 5831. These LOEs have been replaced as a result of the State Board review and revision of the Regional Board assessment of these monitoring data. |
||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for copper. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Site 8 - Santa Ana River @ Hamner Ave. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected during dry weather conditions (mid-summer) from 1994 to 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | During dry weather season, storm drain systems do not experience continuous flows. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31370 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Nine samples collected did not exceed the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence replaces LOEs 5337 and 5831. These LOEs have been replaced as a result of the State Board review and revision of the Regional Board assessment of these monitoring data. |
||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for copper. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at five sites in Santa Ana River Reach 3: Etiwanda, Hamner, MWD Xing, River Road, and Van Buren. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on 3/15/2004 and 8/16/2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82401 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for copper is 149 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95742 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Santa Ana River Basin Plan lists the Site Specific Objective for Copper in the Santa Ana River (Reaches 2, 3, and 4) as being hardness dependent and specifies a formula for calculating the objectives. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
DECISION ID |
100184 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Lead |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2023 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | New data were collected but not enough to support a delisting.
2010 US EPA Action- USEPA Final Approval Decision Details: The November 12, 2010 USEPA partial approval letter and the October 11, 2011 final approval letter both from Alexis Strauss, USEPA Region 9, to Tom Howard, SWRCB, concluded the following: USEPA has added Santa Ana River Reach 3 to the list of water quality limited segments requiring a TMDL for lead. USEPA determined that the metals criteria established in the California Toxics Rule (CTR) apply to this segment and that using the 40 CFR 131.38(b) conversion factors for lead and copper is appropriate in this action. The numeric criteria in 40 CFR 131.38 applicable to lead and copper are themselves products of the conversion factors. Before developing the criteria that EPA is now assessing, the agency established, pursuant to Clean Water Act section 304, Guidance Values for copper and lead expressed in the total recoverable fraction. Using those "total recoverable" Guidance Values, EPA then calculated the current "dissolved" criteria for those metals by applying the conversion factors in 40 CFR 131.38(b). See, 40 CFR 131.38(b)(1), footnote m. USEPA concludes that the same factors that EPA used to convert "total recoverable" to "dissolved" values can be appropriately used to convert the current "total recoverable" data to a "dissolved" equivalent. USEPA evaluated data using the criteria and default conversion factors established in the CTR, and found impairment of this water body by lead. Of the 28 samples, 22 exceeded the CTR criteria. An additional 14 samples were collected with detection limits that were inadequate to assess the standard and may represent additional exceedances. Observed exceedances are greater than the 3% exceedance threshold for toxicants as expressed in Table 3.1 of the State Listing Policy. The data included sampling results from both wet and dry periods. EPA notes that the subject criteria apply regardless of season, and EPA concludes that the sampling data are sufficiently representative. For clarification, the Regional and State Water Board decision recommendations made prior to USEPA's final decision are presented below: Note: All lines of evidence (LOEs) previously made by the Regional Boards have NOT been revised. USEPA's worksheet has been included in the administrative record as reference number 3645, titled "USEPA Region 9 data summary for addition of lead to California 2010 303 (d) list for Santa Ana River Reach 3". |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
The water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95743 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for lead. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Santa Ana River Basin Plan lists the Site Specific Objective for Lead in the Santa Ana River (Reaches 2, 3, and 4) as being hardness dependent and specifies a formula for calculating the objectives. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82334 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Lead. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for lead is 128 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25788 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the CTR acute criteria. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. Since the data was submitted in the total recoverable form, a total to dissolved translator of 6.1 was used to convert the data to dissolved form. This translator was developed through the Use Attainability Analyses that was done for the Santa Ana River. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: The following criteria varies according to hardness: lead: 11/1/94: 291.83 ug/l, 6/6/95: 262.12 ug/l, 8/14/95: 320.81 ug/l, 7/30/96: 302.80 ug/l, 8/20/97: 262.12 ug/l, 7/29/98: 289.11 ug/l; | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on in the wet season starting with 6/8/94 through 7/29/98 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5940 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Most of this data was reported as non detect and the detection limit was above the chronic criteria. So none of the samples were used in the assessment. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected monthly starting with September 1973 through August 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as grab samples during the dry weather. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31374 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the 6 samples exceeded the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence is a result of re-evaluation of data using USEPA conversion factors (translators) to convert dissolved metals criteria to total metals criteria. There are 3 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5338, 5940, 25788 and 8361. |
||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for lead. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Site 8 - Santa Ana River @ Hamner Ave. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected during dry weather conditions (mid-summer) from 1994 to 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | During dry weather season, storm drain systems do not experience continuous flows. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31369 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Five samples collected did not exceed the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence is a result of re-evaluation of data using USEPA conversion factors (translators) to convert dissolved metals criteria to total metals criteria. There are 3 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5338, 5940, 25788 and 8361. |
||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for lead. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at five sites in Santa Ana River at Etiwanda, Hamner, MWD Xing, River Road, and Van Buren. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on 8/16/2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5338 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 40 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 40 samples collected none exceeded the acute CTR criteria Since the data was reported as total recoverable. the total to dissolved ratio of 6.1 that was developed from the Use Attainability Analyse of the Santa Ana River was used to translate the total concetrations to dissolved concentrations. This data came from the NPDES discharger's consultant who keeps the data in a database. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | CTR criterion depends on hardness and hardness in the river changes daily. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected below Prado Dam at the bottom of the watershed that drains into the Santa Ana River Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | This data encompasses 17 years of monitoring. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Hardness changes in the river and the criterion changes as well because it is hardness dependent. The data was collected during the wet season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31372 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 37 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 29 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Forty-seven samples were collected for this data set. However, only 37 samples have results above the criterion or non-detect results with sample detection limits below the criterion.
Twenty-nine of the 37 samples exceeded the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria. This line of evidence is a result of re-evaluation of data using USEPA conversion factors (translators) to convert dissolved metals criteria to total metals criteria. There are 3 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5338, 5940, 25788 and 8361. |
||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for lead. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Site 8 - Santa Ana River @ Hamner Ave. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected during wet weather conditions from 1994 to 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8361 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 7 samples taken none exceeded the acute criteria. This data was evaluated using the total to dissolved ratio of 6.1 that was developed from the Use Attainability Analyses for the Santa Ana River. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule lead criteria is hardness dependent and ranged as follows: 116.63ppb-613.57ppb. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 11/30/1972 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were collected during the months of October through April which are considered to be the wet season months. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97066 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Dairies |
TMDL Name: | Middle Santa Ana River Waterbodies - Nitrogen Compounds TMDLs |
TMDL Project Code: | 750 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 05/16/2007 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five (5) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One (1) of the four (4) samples exceed the E. coli Single Sample Maximum Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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 (1) of the four (4) samples exceeded the E. coli Single Sample Maximum Objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 5 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using Table 4.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. The Prado Area Streams Pathogen TMDL was approved by the RWQCB in 2007 and subsequently approved by USEPA on 5/16/07. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | The Prado Area Streams Pathogen TMDL was approved by the RWQCB in 2007 and subsequently approved by USEPA on 5/16/07. |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82415 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the four samples exceeded the fecal coliform objectve. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed more than 400/100 ml. Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station SAR-RIVERRD-01. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a year in August from 2006 to 2009 and once in 1996. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82351 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the four samples exceeded the total coliform guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample total coliform concentration shall not exceed more than 10,000/100ml. Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches (CDPH 2011). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station SAR-RIVERRD-01. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a year In August from 2006 to 2009 and once in 1996. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82413 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the four samples exceeded the E.coli guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample E. coli concentration shall not exceed more than 235/100ml. USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria 1986. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station SAR-RIVERRD-01. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once year in August from 2006 to 2009 and once in 1996. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82412 | ||||
Pollutant: | Enterococcus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Three of the three samples exceeded the entercoccus guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample entercoccus concentration shall not exceed more than 61/100ml. USEPA Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria 1986. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station SAR-RIVERRD-01. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a year in August from 2006 to 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2991 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pathogens | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74479 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Alachlor | Atrazine | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) | Carbaryl | Chlorpyrifos | Dieldrin | Disulfoton | Methyl Parathion | Simazine |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of forty-eight (48) samples exceeded the US EPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Instantaneous Maximum, California Department of Fish and Game Criteria, or the California Toxics Rule 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. 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: | 7827 | ||||
Pollutant: | Alachlor | Atrazine | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) | Carbaryl | Chlorpyrifos | Dieldrin | Disulfoton | Methyl Parathion | Simazine | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 48 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 48 samples, none exceeded the guidelines. | ||||
Data Reference: | Concentrations of Pesticides in the waterbodies in the Santa Ana Region | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region¿s Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Instantaneous Max - alachlor: 76 ppb, atrazine: 1 ppb, azinphos methyl: 0.01 ppb, carbaryl: 0.02 ppb, disulfoton: 0.05 ppb, simazine: 10 ppb.
California Department of Fish and Game: chlropyrifos: 0.014 ppb, parathion: 0.08 ppb, permethrin: 0.03 ppb. CTR Freshwater aquatic life protection Cont Conc 4 day ave - dieldrin: 0.056 ppb |
||||
Guideline Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at: Santa Ana River Below Prado Dam California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at MWD Crossing California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at Riverside Rd Near Riverside California_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel Near Rubidoux At Santa Ana River_USGS NAWQA site, | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on the following dates: 7/13/00, 8/15-17/00, 9/13/00, 10/19/00, 12/13/00, 1/18/01, 2/21/01, 3/21/01, 4/19/01, 5/16/01, 6/13/01, 7/12/01, 8/14/01, 9/12/01, 10/15/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02, 2/13/02, 3/13/02, 4/17/02, 6/12/02/, 8/14/02, 10/17/02, 12/11/02, 1/15/03, 2/13/03, 3/12/03, 4/16/03, 6/11/03, 8/13/03, 10/15/03, 12/10/03, 1/14/04, 2/11/04, 3/10/04, 4/12/04, 6/17/04, 8/12/04, 10/14/04, 12/13/04, 2/10/05, 5/13/05, 6/13/05, 8/8/05. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it came from the Department of Pesticide Regulation. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
76130 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Aluminum |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two (2) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Ten (10) of the samples exceed the US EPA National Recommended Criteria of 750 ug/l (acute) and two samples exceed the National Recommended Criteria of 85 ug/l (chronic). These exceedances occurred 20 years ago. The most current data (1990 and beyond), show some exceedances but these occurred in March 2004 (considered to be wet season conditions) during a time the watershed was heavily influenced by wildfires. Pursuant to Section 6.1.5.3, if the majority of the samples were collected on a single day or during a single short term natural event (wildfires) the data shall not be used as the primary data set supporting the listing decision. In addition, grouping the data as a whole is an inappropriate way of assessing the data because the two standards that would apply in the dry season (chronic) is different from the standard that would apply in the wet season (acute). The chronic recommended criteria of 85 ug/l is not an appropriate criteria to use during the dry season because it was derived using toxicity information on only one species of fish and assuming a low hardness that is not representative to arid west conditions of Southern California. There are several exceedances of the 750 ug/l criteria in the dataset. 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 does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy because 3. Ten of Forty-one samples exceeded the US EPA National Recommended Criteria of 750 ug/l (acute) during wet weather conditions (assumed to be between October 1 and April 30) and two samples exceed the Recommended Criteria of 85 ug/l (chronic) during the dry weather conditions and this does 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. 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: | 28245 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | There were 34 samples taken of which there is no applicable guideline during the dry season. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 1982 and ending with 2005. The samples were dry weather samples | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | These samples were collected during the dry season (which is assumed to be between May 1 and September 30). | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8321 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 10 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 41 samples collected, 10 exceeded the US EPA National Recommended Criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | US EPA National Recommended Criteria of 750 ug/l (acute) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 1982 and ending with 2005. The samples were wet weather samples | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The watershed was heavily influenced by wildfires in March 2004. The samples were collected during wet weather conditions (assumed to be between October 1 and April 30). | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96912 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Anthracene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82388 | ||||
Pollutant: | Anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for anthracene is 845 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
74650 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Arsenic |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one-hundred fifty-four (154) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria. 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 (0) of the one-hundred fifty-four (154) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
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: | 95740 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The CTR for arsenic is 150 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25723 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 24 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 24 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule: Arsenic 4-day avg. 150 ug/l and 1-hr avg. 340 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on: 2/17/94, 3/17/94, 11/10/94, 1/23/95, 3/10/95, 12/12/95, 1/31/96, 2/19/96, 3/4/96, 3/13/96, 10/30/96, 11/21/96, 12/9/96, 11/26/97, 1/9/98, 2/3/98, 3/25/98, 1/25/00, 1/24/01, 2/23/01, 4/7/01, 12/26/03, 2/3/04, 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were grab samples taken during the wet weather. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8322 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 118 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 118 samples collected none exceeded the guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | CTR Fresh Water Aquatic Life Protection 4 day Average continuous concentration - 150 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 3/28/1972 through 6/26/2006 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25722 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: Arsenic 4-day avg. 150 ug/l, and 1-hr avg. 340 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 11/1/94, 6/6/95, 8/14/95, 7/30/96, 8/20/97, 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82389 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for arsenic is 33 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
98073 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 and 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutant(s) is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. One of the 3 benthic macroinvertebrate samples exceed (fall below) the California Streams Condition Index (CSCI) threshold for likely altered biological condition. The water segment does not have associated pollutant(s) samples that exceed water quality objectives. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence provides sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this water segment on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Pursuant to section 3.9 of the Listing Policy, the water segment does not exhibit significant degradation in biological populations and/or communities as compared to reference site(s) using the California Stream Condition Index. 4. Pursuant to section 3.9 of the Listing Policy, the water segment does not have associated pollutant(s) samples that exceed water quality objectives.Although there is a salinity/TDS/chloride LOE-incorrect application of the Basin Plan objectives were used to develop the LOE. Limitations of using Table 4-1 WQOs for minerals for the WARM BU are detailed in response to comments. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not being met. The California Stream Condition Index is a new scoring tool for bioassessment data that is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI has been used in some assessments this reporting cycle and will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). If CSCI scores have not been calculated for data and only IBI scores are available, IBI scores will still be used to interpret the data. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | The California Stream Condition Index is a new scoring tool for bioassessment data that is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI has been used in some assessments this reporting cycle and will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). If CSCI scores have not been calculated for data and only IBI scores are available, IBI scores will still be used to interpret the data. |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82390 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Three samples were collected from three different sites on the Santa Ana River during 2006 and 2007 to assess benthic macroinvertebrates. One of the three samples collected had a CSCI score below the 0.79 threshold and therefore exceeds the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. The CSCI scores for the sites are 0.80 and 0.85 (2006) and 0.76 (2007). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
Region 8 CSCI scores and data. | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Inland surface water communities and populations, including vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant species, shall not be degraded as a result of the discharge of waste. Degradation is damage to an aquatic community or population with the result that balanced community no longer exists. The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from stations 801PFB019 (SMCR8_019), 801SAR110 (SMCR8_110), 801SAR151 (SMCR8_151). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in June 2006 at stations 801PFB019 (SMCR8_019) and 801SAR110 (SMCR8_110) and in June 2007 at station 801SAR151 (SMCR8_151). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for the RWB8's Probabilistic Stream Survey CY2006 and CY2007 following SWAMP protocols and data were stored in the SWAMP database. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97663 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82391 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)anthracene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Benzo(a)anthracene is 1050 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
72981 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82392 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Benzo(a)pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Benzo(a)Pyrene is 1450 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97721 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One (1) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. 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 (1) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82393 | ||||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Bifenthrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for bifenthrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 0.43 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.43 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for bifenthrin from Amweg et al. (2005) and Amweg and Weston (2007). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
78023 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Cadmium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Six (6) of the seventy-seven (77) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria. 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. Six (6) of the seventy-seven (77) samples exceeded the beneficial use criteria 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. State Board Review and Conclusion: The April 19, 2010 State Water Board staff report for the 2010 Integrated Report recommended to place this water body on the 303(d) list for cadmium based on the re-evaluation of the data using different data translators: In the original Regional Board assessment, staff translated the total recoverable cadmium data to the dissolved form for comparison to the California Toxics Rule (CTR) criteria using total-dissolved translators developed for the Santa Ana River and its tributaries as part of use attainability analyses conducted in the early 1990's. For cadmium and copper, the translator is 2.6; for lead, the translator is 6.1. State Water Board staff re-evaluated the cadmium data using a default CTR translator to translate the data from total recoverable to dissolved cadmium. This is because the translators developed for the Use Attainability Analysis in the 1990's were superseded in 2000 by the federal promulgation of the CTR. In addition, the 1990 translator was approved by USEPA for use with effluent data in NPDES permits only. As a result of the re-evaluation, there are 2 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5829, 5313, 8349, and 25721. The revised recommendation is as follows: 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant with the CTR chronic criteria. Five of 33 samples exceed the CTR criteria. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Five of 33 samples exceed the California Toxics Rule chronic criteria and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. At the June 15, 2010 State Water Board meeting for approval of the 2010 Integrated Report, the State Water Board directed staff to reevaluate the listing recommendation for this water body-pollutant combination. Based on this reevaluation, State Water Board staff continued to recommend to place this water body on the 303(d) list for cadmium. At the August 4, 2010 State Water Board's follow-up Board meeting for approval of the 2010 Integrated Report, the State Water Board did not approve the State Water Board staff recommendation and instead recommended to not place this water body on the 303(d) list for cadmium. |
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 Review and Conclusion:
The April 19, 2010 State Water Board staff report for the 2010 Integrated Report recommended to place this water body on the 303(d) list for cadmium based on the re-evaluation of the data using different data translators: In the original Regional Board assessment, staff translated the total recoverable cadmium data to the dissolved form for comparison to the California Toxics Rule (CTR) criteria using total-dissolved translators developed for the Santa Ana River and its tributaries as part of use attainability analyses conducted in the early 1990's. For cadmium and copper, the translator is 2.6; for lead, the translator is 6.1. State Water Board staff re-evaluated the cadmium data using a default CTR translator to translate the data from total recoverable to dissolved cadmium. This is because the translators developed for the Use Attainability Analysis in the 1990's were superseded in 2000 by the federal promulgation of the CTR. In addition, the 1990 translator was approved by USEPA for use with effluent data in NPDES permits only. As a result of the re-evaluation, there are 2 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5829, 5313, 8349, and 25721. The revised recommendation is as follows: 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant with the CTR chronic criteria. Five of 33 samples exceed the CTR criteria. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. Five of 33 samples exceed the California Toxics Rule chronic criteria and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. At the June 15, 2010 State Water Board meeting for approval of the 2010 Integrated Report, the State Water Board directed staff to reevaluate the listing recommendation for this water body-pollutant combination. Based on this reevaluation, State Water Board staff continued to recommend to place this water body on the 303(d) list for cadmium. At the August 4, 2010 State Water Board's follow-up Board meeting for approval of the 2010 Integrated Report, the State Water Board did not approve the State Water Board staff recommendation and instead recommended to not place this water body on the 303(d) list for cadmium. |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5829 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 32 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 32 samples collected, none exceeded the CTR criteria. The data was analyzed using the total to dissolved ratio metals translator developed through the use attainability analyses done on the Santa Ana River and its tributaries. The ratio for cadmium is 2.6. This data came from the San Bernardino County Flood Control Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life (this standard varies with hardness ranging from 7.46 ug/l to 95.83 ug/l | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken monthly starting on 2/17/94 through 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | This samples were grab samples collected during the wet season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25721 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. The total to dissolved ratio of 2.6 was used in analyzing this data to convert it to dissolved. The dissolved concentrations were then compared to the chronic criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: The following criteria varies according to hardness: cadmium: 11/1/94: 13.97 ug/l, 6/6/95: 12.7 ug/l, 8/14/95: 15.19 ug/l, 7/30/96: 14.43 ug/l, 8/20/97: 12.7 ug/l, 7/29/98: 13.85 ug/l; copper: 11/1/94: 35.94 ug/l, 6/6/95: 33.19 ug/l, 8/14/95: 38.55 ug/l, 7/30/96: 36.93 ug/l, 8/20/97: 33.19 ug/l, 7/29/98: 35.69 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 11/1/94, 6/6/95, 8/14/95, 7/30/96, 8/20/97, 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5313 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 49 samples have been collected below Prado Dam over a period of 18 years starting with 1973. Four of these samples were counted for the assessment because these had the detection limit below the criteria and of these four none exceeded the CTR criteria for cadmium. Total to dissolved ratio of 2.6 was used in converting the results from total to dissolved and then the results were compared to the acute ctr criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule standard for Cadmium varies according to the hardness so this standard changed daily due to hardness differences from day to day. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station in Reach 3 below Prado Dam which is at the bottom of the watershed draining into Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected starting in 1973 through 1992 and in 2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The criterion for cadmium in the CTR is hardness dependent and the hardness varies in the river, consequently, the standard for cadmium also varies. The samples were collected during the months of October through April and these are the months used to define the wet season so the criteria used to compare the results was the acute criteria. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8349 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 49 samples available only one was used in the assessment because it had a value above the detection limit and that one exceeded the chronic criteria. The rest of the samples were not used in the assessment because the criteria was below the detection limit and the concentrations were reported as non detect. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule cadmium criteria is hardness dependent and ranged as follows: 2.84 ppb - 7.59 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 11/30/1972 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were collected during the dry weather. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31361 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of 5 samples exceed the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence is a result of re-evaluation of data using USEPA conversion factors (translators) to convert dissolved metals criteria to total metals criteria. There are 2 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5829, 5313, 8349, and 25721. |
||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for cadmium. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at five sites in Santa Ana River Reach 3: Etiwanda, Hamner, MWD Xing, River Road, and Van Buren. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/16/2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82394 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for cadmium is 4.98 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 31360 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 28 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 5 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Forty-six samples were collected for this data set. Only 28 samples however have results above the criterion or non-detect results with sample detection limits below the criterion. Five of 28 samples exceed the CTR chronic criterion. Total metals data were converted to compare with dissolved metals criteria.
This line of evidence is a result of re-evaluation of data using USEPA conversion factors (translators) to convert dissolved metals criteria to total metals criteria. There are 2 new LOEs that replace the original group of LOEs. The original LOEs were: 5829, 5313, 8349, and 25721. |
||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) for freshwater aquatic life for cadmium. Numeric criterion varies with hardness. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at Site 8 - Santa Ana River, Reach 3 @ Hamner Avenue. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Grab samples were collected during wet weather conditions from 1994 to 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Wet weather sampling are collected at 4 or more intervals during the rainy season (October 15 through April 15). | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
75089 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Carbofuran | Molinate | Thiobencarb/Bolero |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of forty-four (44) samples exceeded the US EPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Instantaneous Maximum 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. 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: | 7828 | ||||
Pollutant: | Carbofuran | Molinate | Thiobencarb/Bolero | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 44 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the samples collected exceeded the guidelines. | ||||
Data Reference: | Concentrations of Pesticides in the waterbodies in the Santa Ana Region | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region¿s Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Instantaneous Max: carbofuran: 0.5 ppb.
California Dept of Fish and Game: 13 ppb, thiobencarb: 3.1 ppb. |
||||
Guideline Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at: Santa Ana River Below Prado Dam California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at MWD Crossing California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at Riverside Rd Near Riverside California_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel Near Rubidoux At Santa Ana River_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel at Santa Ana River Near Rubidoux California_USGS NAWQA site. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on: 7/13/00, 8/15-17/00, 9/13/00, 10/19/00, 12/13/00, 1/18/01, 2/21/02, 3/21/01, 4/19/01, 5/16/01, 6/13/01, 7/12/01, 8/14/01, 9/12/01, 10/15/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02, 2/13/02, 3/13/02, 4/17/02, 6/12/02, 8/14/02, 10/17/02, 12/11/02,1/15/03, 2/13/03, 3/12/03, 4/16/03, 6/11/03, 8/13/03, 10/15/03, 12/10/03, 1/14/04, 2/11/04, 3/10/04, 4/12/04, 6/17/04, 8/12/04, 6/13/05, 8/8/05. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it came from the Department of Pesticide Regulation. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
77727 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chemical oxygen demand (COD) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One hundred eighty-six (186) of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One hundred eighty-six (186) of one thousand two hundred eighty-three (1,283) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective 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: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8259 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chemical oxygen demand (COD) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Groundwater Recharge | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1283 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 186 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 1283 samples collected, 186 exceeded the Basin Plan's objective and the exceedances occurred multiple times beginning with 7/6/1973 through 9/3/1998. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: COD 30 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with 7/6/1973 through 8/30/2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
98516 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chlordane |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82395 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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: | 0 of 1 samples collected exceeded the criteria for chlordane concentration (Sum of trans-Chlordane, cis-Chlordane, cis-Nonachlor, trans-Nonachlor, and Oxychlordane). | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic substances in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Probable Effect Concentration for Chlordane in freshwater sediments is 17.6 ug/kg(MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station 801SARVRx (Santa Ana River at River Road). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
97777 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chlordane |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82395 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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: | 0 of 1 samples collected exceeded the criteria for chlordane concentration (Sum of trans-Chlordane, cis-Chlordane, cis-Nonachlor, trans-Nonachlor, and Oxychlordane). | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic substances in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Probable Effect Concentration for Chlordane in freshwater sediments is 17.6 ug/kg(MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station 801SARVRx (Santa Ana River at River Road). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
74317 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chloride |
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 3.1of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two (2) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eighty-two (82) of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3.Eighty-two (82) of two thousand five hundred and eight (2,508) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 82396 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Groundwater Recharge | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 8 samples collected exceed the water quality objective for chloride in this water body. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the City of Riverside, 2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: Chloride - 140 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples collected upstream and downstream of the WWTP. Upstream: Upstream River Sampling Point (Below MWD pipeline) Downstream: Downstream River Sampling Point (near structure 1) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples taken between in August of 2010, 2011, and 2012. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data collected for compliance with NPDES No. CA0105350. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82397 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 297 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 297 samples collected had no exceedences of the site-specific objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site-pecific objective for Chloride at Santa Ana River, Reach 3 according to table 4-1 of the Santa Ana Basin plan is 140 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from the following stations: SAR-ETIWANDA-01 SAR-HAMNER-01 SAR-MISSION-01 SAR-MWDXING-01 SAR-RIVERRD-01 SAR-VANBUREN-01 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected approximately once a month from February 1994 to August 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8258 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Groundwater Recharge | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2500 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 82 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 2500 samples taken, 82 exceeded the Basin Plan's objective. All the exceedances occurred at one location: Santa Ana River below Prado Dam during the years 11/4/1966 thorugh 10/19/1993 and one exceedance occurring in 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: Chloride - 140 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with 11/4/1966 through 2/21/ 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97781 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82398 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for chlorpyrifos is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 1.77 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample (Amweg and Weston, 2007). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Whole-sediment toxicity identification evaluation tools for pyrethroid insecticides: I. piperonyl butoxide addition. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 26:2389-2396. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97782 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chromium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the six (6) sample exceeds the beneficial use criteria. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the six (6) sample exceeds the beneficial use criteria and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95741 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for chromium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82399 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for chromium is 111 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
73539 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chromium, hexavalent |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of eight (8) samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8324 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium, hexavalent | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the samples taken exceeded the standard. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | CTR Fresh Water Aquatic Life Protection 4 day Average continuous concentration - 11 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 10/21/1971 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97783 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82400 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chrysene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Chrysene is 1290 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of sediment quality guidelines for Florida coastal waters. Ecotoxicology 5: 253-278 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
73871 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Cobalt |
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: | and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of ____samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table _____.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. There is no appropriate criteria to evaluate this pollutant. 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. There is no appropriate criteria availalble to evaluate this pollutant. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8326 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cobalt | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 191 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | There is no guideline or criteria available to assess this pollutant for this beneficial use. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 1/18/1972 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96907 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82402 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Cyfluthrin, total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for cyfluthrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 1.1 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1.1 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for cyfluthrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
96908 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82403 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Cyhalothrin, lambda, total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for lambda-cyhalothrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 0.44 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.44 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for lambda-cyhalothrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
96909 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Cypermethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82404 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cypermethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Cypermethrin, total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for cypermethrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 0.3 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.3 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for cypermethrin from Maund et al. (2002). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Partitioning, bioavailability, and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 21:9-15 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
96910 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82405 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDD. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for sum of DDD is 28.0 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
74035 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the thirty-five (35) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria. 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 (0) of the thirty-five (35) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 82406 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDE. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for sum of DDE is 31.3 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7829 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 34 samples none exceeded the guidelines. | ||||
Data Reference: | Concentrations of Pesticides in the waterbodies in the Santa Ana Region | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region¿s Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Cont Conc 4 day ave: 0.001 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at: Santa Ana River Below Prado Dam California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at MWD Crossing California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at Riverside Rd Near Riverside California_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel Near Rubidoux At Santa Ana River_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel at Santa Ana River Near Rubidoux California_USGS NAWQA site. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on: 7/13/00, 8/15-17/00, 9/13/00, 10/19/00, 12/13/00, 1/18/01, 2/21/01, 3/21/01, 4/19/01, 5/16/01, 6/13/01, 7/12/01, 8/14/01, 9/12/01, 10/15/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02, 2/13/02, 3/13/02, 4/17/02, 6/12/02, 8/14/02, 10/17/02, 12/11/02, 1/15/03, 2/13/03, 3/12/03, 4/16/03, 6/11/03, 8/13/03. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it came from the Department of Pesticide Regulation. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
78167 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the PEC for total DDTs. Zero of the 1 sample exceeds the PEC for sum of DDT. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the PEC for total DDTs. Zero of the 1 sample exceeds the PEC for sum of DDT and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82407 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDT. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for sum of DDT is 62.9 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82352 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for total DDTs is 572 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97210 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Deltamethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82408 | ||||
Pollutant: | Deltamethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Deltamethrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for deltamethrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 0.79 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 0.79 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for deltamethrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
74242 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Diazinon |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the forty-nine (48) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria. 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 (0) of the forty-nine (48) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 7830 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 48 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 48 samples taken none exceeded the California Department of Fish and Game's guidelines | ||||
Data Reference: | Concentrations of Pesticides in the waterbodies in the Santa Ana Region | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region¿s Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Department of Fish and Game: 0.16 ppb for acute and .100 ppb for chronic | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at: Santa Ana River Below Prado Dam California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at MWD Crossing California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at Riverside Rd Near Riverside California_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel Near Rubidoux At Santa Ana River_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel at Santa Ana River Near Rubidoux California_USGS NAWQA site. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on: 7/13/00, 8/15-17/00, 9/13/00, 10/19/00, 12/13/00, 1/18/01, 2/21/01, 3/21/01, 4/19/01, 5/16/01, 6/13/01, 7/12/01, 8/14/01, 9/12/01, 10/15/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02, 2/13/02, 3/13/02, 4/17/02, 6/12/02, 8/14/02, 10/17/02, 12/11/02, 1/15/03, 2/13/03, 3/12/03, 4/16/03, 6/11/03, 8/13/03, 10/15/03, 12/10/03, 1/14/04, 2/11/04, 3/10/04, 4/12/04, 6/17/04, 8/12/04, 10/14/04, 12/13/04, 2/10/05, 5/13/05, 6/13/05, 8/8/05. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it came from the Department of Pesticide Regulation. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82409 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for diazinon is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 11 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 11 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for diazinon from Ding et al. (2011). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97265 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
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 CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82410 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for dieldrin is 61.8 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97266 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Endrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82411 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for endrin is 207 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97267 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82414 | ||||
Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate, total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 1.5 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1.5 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97268 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82416 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fenpropathrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for fenpropathrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 1 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 1 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for fenpropathrin from Ding et al. ( 2011). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97323 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82417 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fluoranthene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Fluoranthene is 2,230 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97324 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Fluorene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82418 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluorene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Fluorene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for fluorene is 536 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
73767 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Iron |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the dry weather samples (dry weather is assumed May 1 through September 30) exceed the National Recommended Criteria of 1,000 ug/l. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of the dry weather samples out of six (6) exceed the National Recommended Criteria of 1,000 ug/l 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. 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: | 5833 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | There is no guideline to assess the 20 samples. The data originated from San Bernardino County Flood Control Distict Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The 20 samples were collected at one station at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The 20 samples were taken on 2/17/94, 3/17/94, 11/10/94, 1/23/95, 3/10/95, 12/12/95, 1/31/96, 2/19/96, 3/4/96, 3/13/96, 10/30/96, 11/21/96, 12/9/96, 11/26/97, 1/9/98, 2/3/98, 3/25/98, 12/26/03, 2/3/04, 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as wet weather grabs. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25789 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | US EPA National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Toxicity: iron 4-day avg. 1000 ug/l, | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants; States' Compliances | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 11/1/94, 6/6/95, 8/14/95, 7/30/96, 8/20/97, 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97325 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82335 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Lindane (gamma-HCH) is 4.99 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
77555 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Malathion |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two (2) of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Two (2) of forty-eight (48) samples exceeded the US EPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Instantaneous Maximum 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. 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: | 7831 | ||||
Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 48 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 48 samples collected only two exceeded the guidelines. | ||||
Data Reference: | Concentrations of Pesticides in the waterbodies in the Santa Ana Region | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region¿s Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Aquatic Life Protection Instantaneous Max: 0.01 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at: Santa Ana River Below Prado Dam California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at MWD Crossing California_USGS NAWQA site, Santa Ana River at Riverside Rd Near Riverside California_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel Near Rubidoux At Santa Ana River_USGS NAWQA site, Sunnyslope Channel at Santa Ana River Near Rubidoux California_USGS NAWQA site. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on: 7/13/00, 8/15-17/00, 9/13/00, 10/19/00, 12/13/00, 1/18/01, 2/21/01, 3/21/01, 4/19/01, 5/16/01, 6/13/01, 7/12/01, 8/14/01, 9/12/01, 10/15/01, 12/12/01, 1/16/02, 2/13/02, 3/13/02, 4/17/02, 6/12/02, 8/14/02, 10/17/02, 12/11/02, 1/15/03, 2/13/03, 3/12/03, 4/16/03, 6/11/03, 8/13/03, 10/15/03, 12/10/03, 1/14/04, 2/11/04, 3/10/04, 4/12/04, 6/17/04, 8/12/04, 10/14/04, 12/13/04, 2/10/05, 5/13/05, 6/13/05, 8/8/05. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed appropriate because it came from the Department of Pesticide Regulation. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
75036 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Mercury |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the ninety-five (95) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria. 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 (0) of the ninety-five (95) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 5834 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 39 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 39 samples, none exceeded the acute criteria listed. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | US EPA National Reccomended Ambient Water Quality Criteria Toxicity: Mercury acute critreria 1.4 ug/l | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Compilation of Water Quality Goals | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one station at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated aread of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected monthly since 2/17/94 through 2/19/2004. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were collected as wet weather grabs. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95744 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the criterion for mercury. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations (4-day average concentrations) for freshwater aquatic organisms exposure to elemental mercury is 0.77 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82336 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for mercury is 1.06 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25724 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the samples taken, none were used in the assessment because these were reported as non detect and the detection limit was above the criteria. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | US EPA National Ambient Water Quality Criteria Toxicity: Mercury Recommended chronic criteria 0.77 ug/l | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 6/8/94 through 7/29/98 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 28291 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish whole body | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 50 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 50 samples taken, none exceeded the National Recommended Criteria. This data came from the Mercury Monitoring Program conducted under Order No. 99-5 NPDES No. CA8000188 | ||||
Data Reference: | This Report presents results of analyses of fish tissues collected from the Santa Ana River basin from 1995 through 2005 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Human Health - consumption of organisms only 0.3 mg/kg | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury. Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Office of Water. EPA-823-R-01-001. January 2001 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 3 stations: SAR 6 - NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec 30, T2SR5W: Located upstream of the Riverside Water Reclamation Facility effluent, just upstream of the MWD pipe crossing in Reach 3. This site is located within Riverside Narrows.
SAR 8 - SW1/4 NE 1/4 Sec 31,T2SR6W: Located downstream of 100% of the RSWRF effluent, upstream of the Hamner Ave bridge in Reach 3. This site is downstream of the Hidden Valley Wildlife Area. SAR 9- NE 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec 10, T3SR7W: located still furher downstream of the RSWRF effluent, upstream of the Prado Dam near the Archibald Avenue/River Road bridge in Reach 3. This site is located just upstream of the Prado Ponds diversion. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected annually since 1995 through 2004 and in 2005. The samples were collected between July and October of each year. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance report is included with the laboratory reports and is acceptable for assessment purposes. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97326 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82337 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Methyl. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for methyl parathion is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 6 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 6 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for methyl parathion from Ding et al. (2011). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicity of Sediment-Associated Pesticides to Chironomus dilutus and Hyalella azteca. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 61:83¿92. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97380 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Naphthalene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82338 | ||||
Pollutant: | Naphthalene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Naphthalene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for naphthalene is 561 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
74041 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Nickel |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the twenty-four (24) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria. 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 (0) of the twenty-four (24) samples exceed the beneficial use criteria 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 5342 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 18 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The data came from the NPDES dischargers, there were 18 samples collected and no exceedances found. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | CTR standard depends on hardness so this objective varies and it ranged from 56 ug/l to 175 ug/l during the sampling period | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at one location below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | This data encompassess 17 years of monitoring monthly from November 1972 to August 2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The standard depends on the hardness in the receiving water and because of that, the standard changes. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95745 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for nickel. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82339 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for nickel is 48.6 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8365 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 18 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 18 samples taken, none exceeded the criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule cadmium criteria is hardness dependent and ranged as follows: 56.54 ppb - 168.54 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 11/30/1972 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96366 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82340 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 2 samples do not exceed the water quality objective for Nitrate (as N) at 10 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana Region (1995): Waters designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The Nitrate (as N) MCL is 10 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Sample was collected at 'SMCR8_191 and 'SMCR8_312, Santa Ana River, Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 6/2/2009 and 6/14/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No quality assurance information was provided. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96425 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82341 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The sample does not exceed the water quality objective for Nitrite (as N) at 1 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana Region (1995): Waters designated for MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the MCL specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The Nitrite (as N) MCL is 1 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 'SMCR8_191, Santa Ana River, Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected on 6/2/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No quality assurance information was provided. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97381 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82342 | ||||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons). | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for PAH, Total is 22,800 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97382 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82343 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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: | Zero of 1 sample collected for Total PCBs exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Toxic substances shall not be discharged at levels that will bioaccumulate in aquatic resources to levels which are harmful to human health. The concentrations of contaminants in waters which are existing or potential sources of drinking water shall not occur at levels that are harmful to human health. The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total PCB is 676 ug/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station 801SARVRx (Santa Ana River at River Road). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
97383 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Permethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82344 | ||||
Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Permethrin, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (2008): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for permethrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 8.9 ug/g and is normalized by the percentage of organic carbon in the sediment sample. The LC50 8.9 ug/g is the geometric mean of LC50 values for permethrin from Amweg et al. (2005). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Use and Toxicity of Pyrethroid Pesticides in the Central Valley, California, USA. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 24:966-972, with erratum 24:No. 5 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97441 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82346 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Phenanthrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Phenanthrene is 1170 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
97442 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Pyrene |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the one (1) sample exceeds the beneficial use criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82347 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Pyrene. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effects level (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for Pyrene is 1520 ug/Kg dry weight (Macdonald et al. 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
100068 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Salinity/TDS/Chlorides |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seven hundred thirty-four (734) of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Seven hundred thirty-four (734) of four thousand one hundred eighty-two (4,182) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective 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. 2017 update:Upon review of the original LOE (8263) that makes up this decision, we recommend the following changes should be made: ¿ The decision should split out salinity, TDS and chlorides into separate LOEs and associate the LOEs to the applicable decisions for TDS (63257), salinity (none), chloride (39991). ¿ On closer inspections, the finding of 734 exceedances out of 4182 samples appears to be based solely on the analysis of total dissolved solids (TDS) samples. This should be confirmed by reviewing Ref2643 (2006 HCMP Database). Chloride sample results (82 exceedances out of 2500 samples) do not appear to be included in the LOE assessment. ¿ Use only data collected after 1983. ¿ Utilize the correct averaging period as outlined in our Basin Plan. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | 2017 update:Upon review of the original LOE (8263) that makes up this decision, we recommend the following changes should be made:
¿ The decision should split out salinity, TDS and chlorides into separate LOEs and associate the LOEs to the applicable decisions for TDS (63257), salinity (none), chloride (39991). ¿ On closer inspections, the finding of 734 exceedances out of 4182 samples appears to be based solely on the analysis of total dissolved solids (TDS) samples. This should be confirmed by reviewing Ref2643 (2006 HCMP Database). Chloride sample results (82 exceedances out of 2500 samples) do not appear to be included in the LOE assessment. ¿ Use only data collected after 1983. ¿ Utilize the correct averaging period as outlined in our Basin Plan. |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8263 | ||||
Pollutant: | Salinity/TDS/Chlorides | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4182 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 734 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 4182 samples collected, 734 ecxeeded the Basin Plan objective. The exceedances occurred between the years 11/4/1966 through 12/27/2006 | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: 700 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with 10/11/1966 through 2/21/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74371 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Selenium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two (2) of the two-hundred twelve (212) samples exceed the beneficial use criterion. 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. Two (2) of the two-hundred twelve (212) samples exceed the beneficial use criterion 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 5946 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 19 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: Selenium 4-day avg. 5 ug/l and 1-hr avg. 20 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants; States' Compliances | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on the following dates: 2/17/94, 3/19/94, 11/10/94, 3/10/95, 12/12/95, 1/31/96, 2/19/96, 3/4/96, 3/13/96, 10/30/96, 11/21/96, 12/9/96, 11/26/97, 1/9/98, 2/3/98, 3/25/98, 12/26/03, 2/3/04, 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as grabs during the wet weather. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25790 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: Selenium 4-day avg. 5 ug/l and 1-hr avg. 20 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants; States' Compliances | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 11/1/94, 6/6/95, 8/14/95, 7/30/96, 8/20/97, 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95733 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for selenium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | National Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: Selenium 4-day avg. 5 ug/l and 1-hr avg. 20 ug/l. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants; States' Compliances | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8341 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 182 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 182 samples collected, 2 exceeded the guidelines. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | CTR Fresh Water Aquatic Life Protection 4 day Average continuous concentration - 20 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 5/29/1973 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74098 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Silver |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One (1) of the seventy (70) samples exceed the beneficial use criterion. 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. One (1) of the seventy (70) samples exceed the beneficial use criterion 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 95731 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for silver. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion maximum concentrations for silver to protect aquatic life in freshwater (1-hour average). The silver criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5937 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: The following criteria varies according to hardness: silver: 11/1/94: 22.69 ug/l, 6/6/95: 19.63 ug/l, 8/14/95: 25.79 ug/l, 7/30/96: 23.85 ug/l, 8/20/97: 19.63 ug/l, 7/29/98: 22.41 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 11/1/94, 6/6/95, 8/14/95, 7/30/96, 8/20/97, 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8368 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 39 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 39 samples taken, only one exceeded the criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule cadmium criteria is hardness dependent and ranged as follows: 4.78 ppb - 44.05 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 11/30/1972 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5343 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 39 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The data was obtained from the NPDES dischargers and out of 30 samples only 1 exceeded the criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | CTR standard depends on hardness so it varies according to the hardness of the receiving water | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The sampling location is below Prado Dam at the bottom of the watershed that drains into the Santa Ana River Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | This data was collected over a span of 17 years. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | the hardness in the river changes and so the standard changes as well. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25785 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 20 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life (this criteria varies according to hardness as follows): silver: 2/17/94: 8.72 ug/l, 3/19/94: 11.15 ug/l, 11/10/94: 20.03 ug/l, 1/23/95: 19.36 ug/l, 3/10/95: 12.13 ug/l, 12/12/95: 25.04 ug/l, 1/31/96: 14.54 ug/l, 2/19/96: 31.64 ug/l, 3/4/96: 42.17 ug/l, 3/13/96: 9.11 ug/l, 10/30/96: 21 ug/l, 11/21/96: 13.37 ug/l, 12/9/96: 18.3 ug/l, 11/26/97: 19.63 ug/l, 1/9/98: 2.41 ug/l, 2/3/98: 18.3 ug/l, 3/25/98: 19.63 ug/l, 12/26/03: 427.84 ug/l, 2/3/04: 83.46 ug/l, 2/19/04: 14.54 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected on: 2/17/94, 3/19/94, 11/10/94, 1/23/95, 3/10/95, 12/12/95, 1/31/96, 2/19/96, 3/4/96, 3/13/96, 10/30/96, 11/21/96, 12/9/96, 11/26/97, 1/9/98, 2/3/98, 3/25/98, 12/26/03, 2/3/04, 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as grab samples during the wet weather. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
73507 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Sodium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There was no new data considered in the 2014 Listing Cycle, this previously made decision will carryover. The following description applies to an earlier Listing Cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One hundred twenty (120) of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One hundred twenty (120) of two thousand eighty-two (2082) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective 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: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8260 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2082 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 120 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 2082 samples collected, 120 exceeded the Basin Plan's objective and the exceedances occurred over several years beginning with 1/14/1969 through 2/21/2007 | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: sodium - 110 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with 7/16/1984 through 2/21/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74083 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Sulfates |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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.
Three (3) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One hundred twenty-three (123) of the two thousand six hundred eighty-four (2684) samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List 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 hundred twenty-three (123) of the two thousand six hundred eighty-four (2684) samples exceed the water quality objective 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 8262 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2379 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 123 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 2379 samples collected, 123 exceeded the Basin Plan objective. The exceedances occurred between the years 1/6/1967 through 11/16/1993 and one exceedance occurred on 8/9/2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: sulfate - 150 mg/l | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with 710/11/1966 through 2/21/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82348 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 8 samples collected exceed the water quality objective for sulfates in this water body. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the City of Riverside, 2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective for sulfates is 150 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples collected upstream and downstream of the WWTP. Upstream: Upstream River Sampling Point (Below MWD pipeline) Downstream: Downstream River Sampling Point (near structure 1) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples taken between in August of 2010, 2011, and 2012. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data collected for compliance with NPDES No. CA0105350. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82349 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 297 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 297 samples collected had no exceedences of the site-specific objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site-pecific objective for Sulfates at Santa Ana River, Reach 3 according to table 4-1 of the Santa Ana Basin plan is 150 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from the following stations: SAR-ETIWANDA-01 SAR-HAMNER-01 SAR-MISSION-01 SAR-MWDXING-01 SAR-RIVERRD-01 SAR-VANBUREN-01 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected approximately once a month from February 1994 to August 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
95046 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the eight (8) samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the eight (8) samples exceed the water quality objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82350 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 8 samples collected were above 90°F (all samples collected between June and October). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the City of Riverside, 2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Basin Plan: The natural receiving water temperature of inland surface waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses. The temperature of waters designated WARM shall not be raised above 90°F June through October or above 78°F during the rest of the year as a result of controllable water quality factors. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples collected upstream and downstream of the WWTP. Upstream: Upstream River Sampling Point (Below MWD pipeline) Downstream: Downstream River Sampling Point (near structure 1) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples taken between in August of 2010, 2011, and 2012. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data collected for compliance with NPDES No. CA0105350. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
95102 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of the two hundred ninety-seven (297) samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List 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 (0) of the two hundred ninety-seven (297) samples exceed the water quality objective 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 82353 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 86 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 297 samples collected had no exceedences of the site-specific objective.It doesn't appear that the 297 samples excluded samples that were not collected in August or September. Any samples collected in Aug/Sept were counted as 1 sample event, whether the month was sampled 1 time or multiple times, in accordance with the Basin Plan.
SAR-Mission -16 distinct events; SAR-MWXDING-16 distinct events; SAR-VanBuren -6 distinct events; SAR-Riverside -16 distinct events; SAR-Etiwanda -16 distinct events; SAR-Hamner -16 distinct events. The total number of events is: 86. |
||||
Data Reference: | Data for Metals and Other Inorganic Pollutants in Orange County Water District, 1994-2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site-pecific objective for Total Dissolved Solids at Santa Ana River, Reach 3 according to table 4-1 of the Santa Ana Basin plan is 700 mg/L. Measured as baseflow, defined in our Basin Plan, as those samples collected in August and September. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from the following stations: SAR-ETIWANDA-01 SAR-HAMNER-01 SAR-MISSION-01 SAR-MWDXING-01 SAR-RIVERRD-01 SAR-VANBUREN-01 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected approximately once a month from February 1994 to August 2009. The number of samples calculated should be limited to baseflow condition. Any samples collected in Aug/Sept were counted as 1 sample event, whether the month was sampled 1 time or multiple times, in accordance with the Basin Plan. Other samples collected outside August and September were not included in accordance with the definition of baseflow in the Basin Plan. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected under the Orange County Water District Main Laboratory Quality Assurance Manual. November 2009. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
73671 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Three (3) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Seven (7) of the two hundred sixty-four (264) samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List 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. Seven (7) of the two hundred sixty-four (264) samples exceed the water quality objective 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 82355 | ||||
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: | The sample did not exceed the Total Nitrogen water quality objective at 10 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 4-1 of the Santa Ana Basin Plan (1995) states that the water quality objective for Total Nitrogen for Santa Ana River (Reach 3), is 10 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Sample was collected at 'SMCR8_312, Santa Ana River (Reach 3). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sample was collected on 6/14/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No quality assurance information was provided. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82354 | ||||
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: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The sample did exceed the Total Nitrogen water quality objective at 2 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the Streams of Region 8, 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 4-1 of the Santa Ana Basin Plan (1995) states that the water quality objective for Total Nitrogen for Santa Ana River (Reach 3), is 2 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Sample was collected at 'SMCR8_191, Santa Ana River, Reach 3. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sample was collected on 6/2/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | No quality assurance information was provided. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8257 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 262 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the two samples collected, six exceeded the Basin Plan's objective. The exceedances occurred at the following locations: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: Total Inorganic Nitrogen - 10 mg/l. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with April 5, 2006 through February 21, 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96031 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Toxicity |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status for toxicity, and waters may be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List for toxicity alone.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 1 samples exhibit sediment toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 1 samples exhibit sediment toxicity and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82356 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One sample was collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. The sample did not exhibit significant toxicity. The toxicity test included survival of Hyalella azteca. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided). | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Region 8 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Freshwater Invertebrates, Second Edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development, Duluth, MI , U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water, Washington, DC EPA-600/R-99/064 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at station 801SARVRx. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in June 2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | All data was collected following the Standard Operating Procedures and Data Quality Objectives outlined in the SWAMP QAMP, (Puckett, 2002). QA data are included in submission. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
73929 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Six (6) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Ten (10) of the one-hundred twenty (119) samples exceed the beneficial use criterion. 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. Ten (10) of the one-hundred nineteen (119) samples exceed the beneficial use criterion 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 because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
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: | 5836 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 20 samples collected, 7 exceeded the standards/guidelines listed. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life (this criteria varies according to hardness as follows): 2/17/94: 174.64 ug/l, 3/19/94: 197.16 ug/l, 11/10/94: 263.08 ug/l, 1/23/95: 258.66 ug/l, 3/10/95: 205.48 ug/l, 12/12/95: 293.6 ug/l, 1/31/96: 224.6 ug/l, 2/19/96: 329.5 ug/l, 3/4/96: 379.6 ug/l, 3/13/96: 178.43 ug/l, 10/30/96: 269.23 ug/l, 11/21/96: 215.57 ug/l, 12/9/96: 251.58 ug/l, 11/26/97: 260.43 ug/l, 1/9/98: 277.98 ug/l, 2/3/98: 251.58 ug/l, 3/25/98: 260.43 ug/l, 1/9/98: 277.98 ug/l, 2/3/98: 251.58 ug/l, 3/25/98: 260.43 ug/l, 12/26/03: 1,188.55 ug/l, 2/3/04: 531.34 ug/l, 2/19/04: 224.66 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The 20 samples were collected at one station at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The 20 samples were taken on 2/17/94, 3/17/94, 11/10/94, 1/23/95, 3/10/95, 12/12/95, 1/31/96, 2/19/96, 3/4/96, 3/13/96, 10/30/96, 11/21/96, 12/9/96, 11/26/97, 1/9/98, 2/3/98, 3/25/98, 12/26/93, 2/3/04, 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as wet weather grabs. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5350 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 88 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The data was obtained from the NPDES dischargers who with the help of Wildermouth Environmental Consutling, have compiled it into a database. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | CTR standard varies because it is hardness dependent and the hardness in the river changes from day to day. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Lyris list and mailing list used to send notice of opportunity for public comment on the proposed 2010 Integrated Report, April 19, 2010 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One location below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The data was collected over a span of 17 years. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The standard depends on hardness and the hardness of the river changes from day to day. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82357 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
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 data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Statewide Stream Pollution Trends Study 2008 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (SDRWQCB 2007): 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. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity for sediment-dwelling organisms) for zinc is 459 mg/Kg dry weight (MacDonald et al. 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Santa Ana River at Prado Basin Park Rd station (801SARVRx).] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected on a single day 6/4/2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | SWAMP data collected before September 2008 followed the QAMP (2002), however there may have been overlap in QA. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8371 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 88 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 88 samples taken, 3 exceeded the standard. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule cadmium criteria is hardness dependent and ranged as follows: 129.89 ppb - 404.20 ppb | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 6 locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., Below Prado Dam | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected several times per month throughout a period of several years beginning with 11/30/1972 through 8/16/2005 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 25791 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 6 samples taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Narrative Objective: The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Aquatic Life: The following criteria varies according to hardness: zinc: 11/1/94: 279.72 ug/l, 6/6/95: 260.43 ug/l, 8/14/95: 297.92 ug/l, 7/30/96: 286.68 ug/l, 8/20/97: 260.43 ug/l, 7/29/98: 277.98 ug/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 11/1/94, 6/6/95, 8/14/95, 7/30/96, 8/20/97, 7/29/98. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken during the dry season. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 95732 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for Santa Ana River, Reach 3 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples collected by the City of Corona exceeded the objective for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for metals in Temescal Creek and Santa Ana River, July 2009-July 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The dissolved criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from one station, STNA1 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the weeks of 2009-07-16 and 2010-07-08 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for NPDES permit number CA8000383. The Quality Assurance Project Plan for the City of Corona Water and Power water quality monitoring program was followed. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | QA Documents for City of Corona NPDES data submitted to 2014 integrated report. Babcock and Test America. | ||||
DECISION ID |
77495 |
Region 8 |
Santa Ana River, Reach 3 |
||
Pollutant: | pH |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section three (3) of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Three (3) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Eighteen (18) of the one thousand three hundred sixty-one (1361) samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Eighteen (18) of the one thousand three hundred sixty-one (1361) samples exceeded the Basin Plan Objective 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 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: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5942 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 3 measurements taken, none exceeded the standards/guidelines listed above. This data was obtained from the self monitoring reports submitted by San Bernardino County Flood Control District Storm Water Program. | ||||
Data Reference: | San Bernardino County Flood Control District data from storm water program | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana Region's Basin Plan Numeric Objective: The pH of inland surface waters shall not be raised above 8.5 or depressed below 6.5 as a result of controllable water quality factors. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at the Hamner Avenue Bridge in the Santa Ana River near the City of Norco in the unincorporated area of Riverside County. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were taken on 12/26/03, 2/3/04, 2/19/04. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The samples were taken as grab samples during the wet weather. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data¿s quality is deemed appropriate because it originated from an NPDES discharger in compliance with their monitoring and reporting program requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82345 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 8 samples collected exceed the water quality objective for pH in this water body. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in the City of Riverside, 2010. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan Objective: The ph of inland surface waters shall not be raised above 8.5 pH units or depressed below 6.5 pH units as a result of controllable water quality factors. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples collected upstream and downstream of the WWTP. Upstream: Upstream River Sampling Point (Below MWD pipeline) Downstream: Downstream River Sampling Point (near structure 1) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples taken between in August of 2010, 2011, and 2012. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data collected for compliance with NPDES No. CA0105350. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 8261 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1350 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 18 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 1350 field measurements collected, 18 exceeded the Basin Plan's objective and the exceedances occurred over several years beginning with 1/14/1969 and ending with 2/21/2007. Fourteen of the exceedances were above the Basin Plan objective of 8.5 pH units and 4 were below the objective of 6.5 pH units. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2006 HCMP Database | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Santa Ana River Basin Plan Objective: pH 6.5 - 8.5 pH units | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at six locations in the Santa Ana River as follows: at Etiwanda Avenue, at Hamner, at MWD Xing, at River Road, at Van Buren Blvd., and below Prado Dam. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected multiple times per month over several years beginning with 10/11/1966 through 2/21/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The data's quality is deemed acceptable because it was submitted by an NPDES discharger in accordance with its Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||