Water Body Name: | Compton Creek |
Water Body ID: | CAR4051501019990202111430 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
153905 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2035 |
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 4.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.9, waters are listed when a bioassessment shows diminished numbers of species or other metrics (compared to a reference site) and this condition is associated with another pollutant. Twelve lines of evidence are available to assess this pollutant. 3 of 3 samples showed evidence of benthic community impairment according to the Index of Biological Integrity. 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. All three of the more recent bioassessment surveys in this water body showed the benthic community to be likely impacted or in poor condition and the 4 previous samples also showed the benthic community to be in poor condition. Additionally, this water body is impaired due to several pollutants, including aluminum, E. coli, zinc and pH. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are 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: | 82654 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 39 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 39 averages of pH had 9 exceedences. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH of all inland surface waters shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from sites 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately once a year from June 2005 to October 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Toxicity testing methods and requirements are in the NPDES permit CA0056227. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 253064 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed LA County MS4 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the MS4 database assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved zinc criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is hardness dependent. The criterion when calculated using a default hardness of 100 mg/L is 120 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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 1 monitoring site: CC_ELS (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-01-20 and 2019-08-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315055 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W3 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315054 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W1 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315040 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W6 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315130 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W2 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315038 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W5 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315041 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W4 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83812 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of 15 samples tested for dissolved zinc exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) for dissolved zinc to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The zinc 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 hardness of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 30224 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wetland Habitat | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The IBI scores at this site ranked in the ¿very poor¿ range (1 in 2003 and 3 in 2004). | ||||
Data Reference: | Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 5, Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area, pp5.1 - 5.40 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan Objectives for Toxicity which states ¿All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analyses of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropraite methods as specified by the State or Regional Board.¿ | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked according to very good (80-56), good (41-55), fair (27-40), poor (14-26) and very poor (0-13) habitat conditions. Sites with scores below 26 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 3, Methods, pp3.1 - 3.28 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 5, Los Angeles River Watershed Management Area, pp5.1 - 5.40 | ||||
Guideline Reference: | A Quantitative Tool for Assessing the Integrity of Southern Coastal California Streams. Appendix 7-B Environmental Management Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 493-504. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | One site in Compton Creek was sampled, upstream
of the confluence with the Los Angeles River, at N 33º 50.784¿ W 118º 12.528. |
||||
Temporal Representation: | Sites were sampled in October of 2003 and October of 2004. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Benthic macroinvertebrate populations and IBI scores may also be affected by a wide range of anthropogenic stressors. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with California Stream Bioassessment Procedure. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Los Angeles County 1994-2005 Integrated Receiving Water Impacts Report. Section 3, Methods, pp3.1 - 3.28 | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (Protocol Brief for Biological and Physical/Habitat Assessment in Wadeable Streams) California Department of Fish and Game Water Pollution Control Laboratory Aquatic Bioassessment Laboratory Revision Date - December, 2003 | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83829 | ||||
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: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Three samples were collected from Compton Creek over three years. All three samples collected had IBI scores below 40. The scores were 6 (2006), 6 (2007) and 3 (2008). | ||||
Data Reference: | Bioassessment Monitoring Report in Los Angeles County, 2006-2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of a Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) for Wadeable Streams in Northern Coastal California and its Application to Regional 305(b) Assessment | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from Compton Creek upstream of the confluence with the Los Angeles River, station 8. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2006, 2007 and 2008. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Qaulity assurance is good. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) contracted Weston Solutions, Inc. to perform biological assessments. Sampling and analysis followed the protocols described in the California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP) (Harrington, 2003), and also incorporated the Southern California Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) (Ode et al., 2005). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 303004 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | STV | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 29 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed LA County MS4 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 11 of the 29 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the MS4 database assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective to protect the REC-1 beneficial use where the salinity is less than 1 parts per thousand 95 percent or more of the time applies a statistical threshold value to E. coli of 320 cfu/100 mL, not to be exceeded by more than 10 percent of samples within a calendar month (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): CC_ELS (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2015-11-18 and 2019-12-18 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
DECISION ID |
150286 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | See TMDL documentation |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Pathogens (15) |
TMDL Project Code: | 238 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/23/2012 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2, 4.3 and 4.11 of the Listing Policy. Under Section 4.3 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Because a statistically sufficient number of geomean samples were not available, attainment of the bacteria objective was determined based only on the STV per the situation-specific weight of evidence approach outlined in Sections 4.11 of the Listing Policy. 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. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 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. 11 of 29 samples exceeded the statistical threshold value for E. coli and these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table NUMBER of the Listing Policy. 4. The Los Angeles River Bacteria TMDL was approved by USEPA on 3/23/2012. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 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: | 4094 | ||||
Pollutant: | Coliform Bacteria | ||||
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 pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 303004 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | STV | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 29 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed LA County MS4 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 11 of the 29 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the MS4 database assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective to protect the REC-1 beneficial use where the salinity is less than 1 parts per thousand 95 percent or more of the time applies a statistical threshold value to E. coli of 320 cfu/100 mL, not to be exceeded by more than 10 percent of samples within a calendar month (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): CC_ELS (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2015-11-18 and 2019-12-18 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
DECISION ID |
138332 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 10/29/2008 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2 and section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status. 3 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 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. 2 of 21 samples exceeded the criteria and these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. The Los Angeles River and Tributaries Metals TMDL was approved by USEPA on 10/29/2008. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 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: | 253064 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed LA County MS4 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the MS4 database assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved zinc criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is hardness dependent. The criterion when calculated using a default hardness of 100 mg/L is 120 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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 1 monitoring site: CC_ELS (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-01-20 and 2019-08-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 253041 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed LA County MS4 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the MS4 database assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved zinc criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is hardness dependent. The criterion when calculated using a default hardness of 100 mg/L is 120 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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 1 monitoring site: CC_ELS (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2016-08-20 and 2018-11-14 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83812 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of 15 samples tested for dissolved zinc exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) for dissolved zinc to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The zinc 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 hardness of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83813 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for zinc of 459 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for zinc is 459 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Sediment samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
138331 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chloride |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 243937 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data from the Los Angeles County MS4 Permit to determine beneficial use support. The results are as follows: 1 out of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the MS4 database assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region gives a site specific objective for Chloride in Compton Creek of 150 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Station CC_ELS (33.917332, -118.249956), located in Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The water samples were taken between 1/20/2016 - 8/13/2019, per the monitoring requirements listed in the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Permit. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The work was performed in accordance with the provisions of the Los Angeles Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System quality control and quality assurance procedures listed in coordinated integrated monitoring plan. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) | ||||
DECISION ID |
153906 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Aluminum |
Final Listing Decision: | 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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | During the 2024 cycle, the 1988 National Recommended Water Quality Criteria used to assess aluminum data was replaced with U.S. EPA’s 2018 Final Recommended Aquatic Life Criteria for Aluminum in Freshwater. 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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 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. 5 of 29 samples exceed the criteria in the evaluation guideline in water and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy for warm freshwater habitat. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. LOEs 83820 and have been replaced by LOEs 315054, 315040, and 315041, respectively, due to a reassessment of data using the 2018 USEPA aluminum criteria. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315041 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W4 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315038 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W5 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315054 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W1 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315040 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W6 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315130 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W2 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315055 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W3 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315025 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W5 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315009 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W1 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315008 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W4 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315010 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W6 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2006-08-10 and 2008-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 315023 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Heal the Bay_2012 data for Compton Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aluminum. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The aluminum criterion for the protection of aquatic life, is pH, total hardness, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) dependent. When total hardness or DOC data were not available, default values based on the level III ecoregions developed by U.S EPA were substituted (EPA, 2018). When pH data were not available, the median pH value for the ecoregion, a pH value from a comparable waterbody, or a pH value from a local study in the same waterbody was used as a comparable surrogate. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Final Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum. EPA-822-R-18-001. Washington, D.C.: Office of Water, USEPA. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: W2 (Compton Creek (El Segundo Blvd)). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2007-03-08 and 2009-10-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was previously assessed without a QAPP. Data reassessed without a QAPP for consistency. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder for previously assessed data that does not have quality assurance information but would require it under newly developed policies. These LOEs were previously assessed and approved at the Regional, State and Federal level in past cycles. The LOEs needed to be moved and/or reassessed but required this reference code for movement within the decision making database. | ||||
DECISION ID |
89976 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
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: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 10/29/2008 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | There is sufficient justification to place this waterbody/pollutant in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard.
This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The Los Angeles River Metals TMDL was approved by USEPA on 10/29/2008. 2. 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: | 83786 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of 15 samples tested for dissolved copper exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) for dissolved copper to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The copper 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 hardness of 100 mg/L was used. In addition, Los Angeles Water Board adopted site-specific objectives for copper based on water-effect ratios. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83787 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for copper of 149 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2476 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
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 |
70408 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Lead |
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: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 12/22/2005 |
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 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
3 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of the 15 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of the 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for 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. 1 of 15, 0 of 0 and 0 of 3 samples exceeded the 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 28 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 4.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 4.11 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: | 83799 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of 15 samples tested for dissolved lead exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations for dissolved lead to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The lead 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 hardness of 100 mg/L was used.. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2477 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
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): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83800 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Lead concentrations found in sediment from station S3 exceeded the narrative objective of 128 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The narrative objective for lead is 128 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Sediment samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
90033 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | pH |
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: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Nitrogen (11) |
TMDL Project Code: | 229 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/18/2004 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under SECTION 3.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 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. 9 of 39 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2of the Listing Policy. 4. The Los Angeles River Nitrogen was approved by USEPA on 03/18/2004. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should 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: | 2472 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
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): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 82654 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 39 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 39 averages of pH had 9 exceedences. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH of all inland surface waters shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from sites 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately once a year from June 2005 to October 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Toxicity testing methods and requirements are in the NPDES permit CA0056227. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94522 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Ammonia |
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.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 30 samples exceeded the 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. 0 of 30 samples exceeded the 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. 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: | 83807 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 30 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 30 samples exceed the water quality objective for ammonia. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Plan objective one-hour average objective for ammonia as nitrogen for freshwater is a function of pH. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at W1, W2, W3, W4, W5, and W6. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected five times between August 10, 2006 and October 13, 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Samples were collected by Heal the Bay through a grant from the California Coastal Conservancy in accordance with the Los Angeles/San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council's Compton Creek Watershed Management Plan. Samples were then analyzed by a certified lab. A signed lab QAPP was included. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
85668 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83821 | ||||
Pollutant: | Anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Anthracene of 845 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Anthracene is 845 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94408 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 and 0 of 15 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83828 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for arsenic of 33 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83827 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of 15 samples tested for disolved arsenic exceeded the numeric criteria of 150 ug/L promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule lists criterion continuous concentrations (expresesed as a 4-day average) for dissolved arsenic to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The numeric criteria for arsenic is 150 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
95038 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83830 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Benz[a]anthracene of 1,050 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Benz[a]anthracene is 1,050 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94167 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83779 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Benzo[a]pyrene of 1,450 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Benzo[a]pyrene is 1,450 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94168 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83780 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 3 samples tested for dissolved cadmium exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations for dissolved cadmium to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The cadmium 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. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94169 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 1 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83781 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the three samples exceeded the PEC for total Chlordane of 17.6 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for total Chlordane is 17.6 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94170 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83782 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the two samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The screening criteria is 0.014 ug/L, chronic 4-day average. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 8/10/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94230 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
2 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 and 0 of 15 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83784 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium, trivalent | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of 15 samples tested for dissolved chromium exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations for dissolved trivalent chromium to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The trivalent chromium 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. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83783 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for chromium of 111 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94461 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Chromium, trivalent |
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83784 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium, trivalent | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of 15 samples tested for dissolved chromium exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations for dissolved trivalent chromium to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The trivalent chromium 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. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94231 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83785 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Chrysene of 1,290 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Chrysene is 1,290 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
98918 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 1 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83788 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Sum of DDD of 28 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Sum of DDD is 28 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
98919 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 1 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83789 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Sum of DDE of 31.3 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects.The PEC for Sum of DDE is 31.3 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94410 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 and 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83790 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for sum of DDTs of 62.9 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for sum of DDTs is 62.9 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83791 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Total DDTs of 572 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Total DDTs is 572 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94232 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Demeton |
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 4 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83792 | ||||
Pollutant: | Demeton | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 samples for Demeton o and Demeton s exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria lists criterion continuous concentrations for Demeton to protect aquatic life in freshwater at 0.1 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 8/10/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94233 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83793 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the two samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The screening criteria is 0.05 ug/L, chronic 4-day average. | ||||
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: | W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 8/10/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94291 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83794 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Dieldrin of 61.8 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Dieldrin is 61.8 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94292 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83795 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Endrin of 207 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Endrin is 207 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94293 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83796 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoranthene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Fluoranthene of 2,230 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Fluoranthene is 2,230 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94294 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide |
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 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83797 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Heptachlor Epoxide of 16 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Heptachlor Epoxide is 16 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94523 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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: | 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.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the 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. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the 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 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 be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
The water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83798 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 15 samples tested for dissolved iron exceeded the recommended numeric criteria of 1,000 ug/L to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations are intended protect freshwater aquatic organisms from chronic exposures and are expressed as 4-day average concentrations. The recommended numeric criteria for iron is 1,000 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. Dissolved concentrations do not exceed the narrative objective. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94462 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 0 sample exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 0 sample exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83801 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were not of sufficient resolution to assess sediment quality. The reporting limits were lower than the PEC criteria of 4.99 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC criteria is 4.99 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94352 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83802 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for mercury of 1.06 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94463 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83803 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the two samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Department of Fish and Game instantaneous criteria for Methyl parathion; parathion, methyl is 0.08 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 8/10/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There were no specific environmental conditions reported during sampling events. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94353 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83804 | ||||
Pollutant: | Naphthalene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Naphthalene of 561 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Naphthalene is 561 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94409 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 15 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 and 0 of 15 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83805 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 15 samples tested for dissolved nickel exceeded the numeric criteria promulgated to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (expressed as a 4-day average concentration) for dissolved nickel to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The nickel 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 hardness of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83806 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for nickel of 48.6 mg/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94355 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83808 | ||||
Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Total PAHs of 22,800 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Total PAHs is 22,800 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94354 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83809 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Phenanthrene of 1,170 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Phenanthrene is 1,170 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94407 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is INSUFFICIENT justification FOR placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 83810 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Non-fixed station physical/chemical (conventional + toxicants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the three samples exceeded the PEC for Pyrene of 1,520 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The consensus based probable effect concentrations (PEC) were used to screen sediment concentrations for potential toxic effects. The PEC for Pyrene is 1,520 ug/kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | All spatially dependent samples (S1, S3, & S5) were collected from sediments within Compton Creek. S1 was approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side); S3 was approximately located at the down stream side of 91 Freeway; and S5 was approximately located at a day-lighted sub-tributary adjacent to County bike path (access is off of Santa Fe through rail spur). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 10/26/2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94464 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 14 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 14 samples exceeded the 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 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: | 83811 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 14 samples tested for total selenium exceeded the recommended criteria of 5 ug/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various pollutants in Compton Creek, Oct. 2006-Dec. 2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations are intended protect freshwater aquatic organisms from chronic exposures and are expressed as 4-day average concentrations. The recommended criteria for selenium is 5 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | W1 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 108th and Main (as the creek day lights--generally north side of creek). W4 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at Crystal Park Casino (sample collected in the earth-bottom portion of the creek at first palm tree on Casino side). W6 was collected from Compton Creek which is approximately located at 710 Freeway on the Down stream side. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 8/10/2006, 10/26/2006, 3/8/2007, 10/15/2008, and 10/13/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bays, "Compton Creek Monitoring Program" description provided with data submitted. This monitoring program is part of the Citys Total Maximum Daily Load ambient monitoring efforts to monitor inputs to the Los Angeles River. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
76403 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
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 section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 a one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero 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. Zero of one samples exhibited significant toxicity to Pimephales promelas and Ceriodaphnia dubia and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of two samples is needed for application of 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: | 28251 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero out of one samples exhibited significant acute and chronic toxicity to Pimephales promelas and Ceriodaphnia dubia. Water quality samples for toxicity were taken in compliance with the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program's monitoring and testing parameters. | ||||
Data Reference: | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program data for all watersheds in the Los Angeles Region 2001-2005. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan states at there shall be no acute or chronic toxicity in ambient waters outside mixing zones. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity was defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA recommended hypothesis testing (parametric Dunnett's Test or non-parametric Fisher's Exact Test). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Fourth Edition. EPA 600/4-90/27. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Water toxicity monitoring was conducted in Compton Creek at station 412LARCMP (Lat: 33.84644, Long: -118.20883). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | A grab sample was taken on 06/30/2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with the sampling and monitoring procedures detailed in the Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. | ||||
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 |
70557 |
Region 4 |
Compton Creek |
||
Pollutant: | Trash |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Nonpoint Source |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Trash (12) |
TMDL Project Code: | 365 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 07/24/2008 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under 2.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. |
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: | 30162 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A TMDL has been approved for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Trash TMDL for the Los Angeles River Watershed was adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB on August 09, 2007 and subsequently approved by USEPA. The TMDL was been integrated into the Basin Plan as Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2007-012. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA information unavailable. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2474 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | -N/A | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Los Angeles County Department of Public Works removed 135.18 tons of trash from Compton Creek between July of 2002 and October of 2005 (Heal the Bay, 2006). | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Waters shall not contain floating materials, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Compton Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Trash removed between July of 2002 and October of 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2473 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Visual | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | QUALITATIVE (EVALUATED) ASSESSMENT - UNSPECIFIED | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Photos showing large amounts of trash throughout Compton Creek. Heal the Bay states that they have been the Los Angeles County Coordinator for Coastal Clean-Up Day and Earth Day at 15 over 60 locations over the last 15 years. According to Heal the Bay, none of these other locations has ever come close to being as polluted with trash as Compton Creek. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Waters shall not contain floating materials, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Various locations throughout Compton Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Photos taken between 2002 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2475 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
Matrix: | -N/A | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Volunteers removed 26.5 tons of trash from Compton Creek on Coastal Clean Up Days and Earth Days between 2002 and 2005 (Heal the Bay, 2006). | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | From the Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Waters shall not contain floating materials, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Compton Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Coastal Clean Up Day (September 21, 2002; September 20, 2003; September 18, 2004; September 17, 2005) and Earth Day (April 1, 2003; April 17, 2004; April 30, 2005). | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Heal the Bay. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||