| Water Body Name: | San Mateo Creek |
| Water Body ID: | CAR2044003219990219102616 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
151710 |
Region 2 |
San Mateo Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
| Revision Status | Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects are being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, additional lines of evidence (LOEs) associating the Benthic Community Effects decision with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants other than benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment or habitat assessment LOEs are necessary to place a water body on the 303(d) List for Benthic Community Effects. Two line(s) of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data is/are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. Zero of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. These data indicate that the waterbody is likely unimpaired for Benthic Community Effects and therefore no other pollutant LOEs need be associated with this decision at this time. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this waterbody segment on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of two benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. Therefore, this water body is not exceeding the water quality threshold for the protection of the COLD beneficial use. The available information indicates that the waterbody/pollutant combination should not be placed on the 303(d) List of impaired waters at this time. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 306703 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 204SMA160 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.912665605 to 0.912665605. | ||||
| Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2024 Integrated Report for Region 2. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are lethal to or that produce significant alterations in population or community ecology or receiving water biota. In addition, the health and life history characteristics of aquatic organisms in waters affected by controllable water quality factors shall not differ significantly from those for the same waters in areas unaffected by controllable water quality factors. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station 204SMA160. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 4/2/2003 to 4/2/2003. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data were collected using Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program protocols | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 306704 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 204SMA140 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.89976 to 0.89976. | ||||
| Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2024 Integrated Report for Region 2. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are lethal to or that produce significant alterations in population or community ecology or receiving water biota. In addition, the health and life history characteristics of aquatic organisms in waters affected by controllable water quality factors shall not differ significantly from those for the same waters in areas unaffected by controllable water quality factors. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station 204SMA140. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 5/25/2016 to 5/25/2016. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data were collected using Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program protocols | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. | ||||
DECISION ID |
88521 |
Region 2 |
San Mateo Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with action other than TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with action other than TMDL)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| Expected Attainment Date: | 2029 |
| Implementation Action Other than TMDL: | This trash listing will be addressed by implementing the trash control provisions of the Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California through the NPDES MS4 permit applicable to this waterbody. |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.11, listing may be proposed based on the situation-specific weight of evidence. There are four lines of evidence available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of these lines of evidence rely on inspection of photographic evidence by Regional Water Board staff trained to conduct the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) methodology. The staff inspected these photos and applied the RTA methodology to develop Category 1 (Level of Trash) and Category 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) scores for each photograph. The other two lines of evidence rely on data from field visits/trash surveys conducted according to the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) methodology. Based on the readily available photographic and trash assessment data for this waterbody, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination to the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. Data have been evaluated that supports this decision. 2. The Rapid Trash Assessment methodology results showed that this waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at two locations. This waterbody also had transportable, Persistent, Buoyant Litter parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at three locations and on two different dates. 3. Photographic evidence has been evaluated that supports this decision. 4. Applying the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology to the photographic evidence suggests that this waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at one location on two different dates. This waterbody also had threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at one location on two different dates. 5. This waterbody is considered impaired by trash because there were exceedances of the evaluation guidelines (poor condition category for the trash assessment metrics) in more than one location or on more than one date. 6. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 7. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1 of the Policy.
8. This trash listing will be addressed by implementing the trash control provisions of the Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California through the NPDES MS4 permit applicable to this waterbody. |
| 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: | 5666 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data available consist of photographic evidence of trash and interpretation of these photos by an experienced trash assessment specialist. Each photograph was analyzed to establish the RTA score for the level of trash and threat to aquatic life parameters, which relate to impairment of REC2 and WILD, respectively. Only those photos clear enough to establish these RTA scores were relied on for the listing determination. These results are available for the following locations on San Mateo Creek:
This waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at one location on two different dates. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Report from Roger James and Larry Kolb containing Trash Photos submitted for consideration in 2008 303(d) listing process | ||||
| Assessment by Matt Cover of Trash Photos (submitted to Region 2 in response to 2008 Data Solicitation) | |||||
| Archive of Trash Photos for San Mateo Creek submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of Rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.
The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Level of Trash score.
If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Threat to Aquatic Life score. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Photographic evidence was analyzed using the RTA methodology for this waterbody for a single location in 2003 and 2006. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Photographic evidence was collected for this waterbody on two separate dates in 2003 and 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Assessments of the photographic evidence using the RTA were performed by Regional Water Board staff person who was a co-author of the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.
Assessments based on photographic evidence were only conducted when sufficient reach-scale and close-up photos were available for a site on a specific date. Photos used for the evaluation needed to be numerous enough and clear enough to document the level of trash at the site in a similar way as the assessor would experience during an actual site visit in the field. For example, at a minimum, one reach-scale photograph (showing at least a 100 linear foot section of the waterbody) and two close-up photographs (of representative trash deposits) were required. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 5665 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data available consist of photographic evidence of trash and interpretation of these photos by an experienced trash assessment specialist. Each photograph was analyzed to establish the RTA score for the level of trash and threat to aquatic life parameters, which relate to impairment of REC2 and WILD, respectively. Only those photos clear enough to establish these RTA scores were relied on for the listing determination. These results are available for one location on San Mateo Creek:
This waterbody had threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at one location on two different dates. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Report from Roger James and Larry Kolb containing Trash Photos submitted for consideration in 2008 303(d) listing process | ||||
| Assessment by Matt Cover of Trash Photos (submitted to Region 2 in response to 2008 Data Solicitation) | |||||
| Archive of Trash Photos for San Mateo Creek submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | |||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of Rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.
The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Level of Trash score.
If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal. Regional Water Board staff trained in the RTA inspected the available photographic evidence and applied the assessment method to determine the Threat to Aquatic Life score. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Photographic evidence was analyzed using the RTA methodology for this waterbody for a single location in 2003 and 2006. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Photographic evidence was collected for this waterbody on two separate dates in 2003 and 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Assessments of the photographic evidence using the RTA were performed by Regional Water Board staff person who was a co-author of the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.
Assessments based on photographic evidence were only conducted when sufficient reach-scale and close-up photos were available for a site on a specific date. Photos used for the evaluation needed to be numerous enough and clear enough to document the level of trash at the site in a similar way as the assessor would experience during an actual site visit in the field. For example, at a minimum, one reach-scale photograph (showing at least a 100 linear foot section of the waterbody) and two close-up photographs (of representative trash deposits) were required. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 5663 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data results were obtained through application the RTA methodology, developed by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The RTA documents the total number and characteristics of pieces of trash per one hundred feet of stream or shoreline. The trash assessment protocol involves picking up and tallying all of the trash items found within the defined boundaries of a site. The tally results for level of trash (relating to REC2) and threat to aquatic life (relating to WILD) assessment parameters were considered for the listing determination. These results are available for field visits/trash surveys conducted in October 2004 and November 2006 according to the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.
This waterbody had transportable, Persistent, Buoyant Litter parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at three locations and on two different dates. |
||||
| Data Reference: | Archive of Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) data for San Mateo Creek submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of Rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.
The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing.
If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | RTA data were collected for this waterbody in three locations in 2004 and 2006. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | RTA data were collected for this waterbody in October 2004 and November 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | San Mateo program staff performed the initial October 2004 assessment jointly with Water Board staff to ensure that the assessment site was identical to the SWAMP location and that San Mateo program staff applied the protocol consistently to the SWAMP protocol. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 5664 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data results were obtained through application the RTA methodology, developed by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The RTA documents the total number and characteristics of pieces of trash per one hundred feet of stream or shoreline. The trash assessment protocol involves picking up and tallying all of the trash items found within the defined boundaries of a site. The tally results for level of trash (relating to REC2) and threat to aquatic life (relating to WILD) assessment parameters were considered for the listing determination. These results are available for field visits/trash surveys conducted in October 2004 and November 2006 according to the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology. This waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at location on two different dates. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Archive of Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) data for San Mateo Creek submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan prohibits discharge of Rubbish, refuse, bark, sawdust, or other solid wastes into surface waters or at any place where they would contact or where they would be eventually transported to surface waters, including flood plain areas.
The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for floating material, Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids, foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan has a narrative objective for settleable material, Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations that result in the deposition of material that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. |
||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) - San Francisco Bay Region (Region 2) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | If the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. This level of trash distracts the eye on first glance, making the site unsuitable for recreation. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, trash distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris (>100 pieces). Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing.
If the RTA Parameter 3 (Threat to Aquatic Life) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), then WILD is not supported. This level of trash is a large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter that is detrimental to aquatic life. The RTA defines poor condition for this parameter as follows, large amount (>50 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, balloons, Styrofoam, cigarette butts; toxic items such as batteries, lighters, or spray cans; large clumps of yard waste or dumped leaf litter; or large amount (>50 pieces) of settleable glass or metal. |
||||
| Guideline Reference: | A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | RTA data were collected for this waterbody in three locations in 2004 and 2006. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | RTA data were collected for this waterbody in October 2004 and November 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | San Mateo program staff performed the initial October 2004 assessment jointly with Water Board staff to ensure that the assessment site was identical to the SWAMP location and that San Mateo program staff applied the protocol consistently to the SWAMP protocol. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70405 |
Region 2 |
San Mateo Creek |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| 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: | A Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | San Francisco Bay Urban Creeks Diazinon |
| TMDL Project Code: | 9 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 05/16/2007 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The Regional Boards will update this decision when new data and information become available and are assessed. The USEPA final decision on the 2006 303(d) list was to move this listing to the being addressed by a USEPA approved TMDL portion of the 303(d) list, because the San Francisco Bay Urban Creeks Diazinon TMDL was approved by USEPA on 5/16/07 (USEPA, 2007). |
| 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: | 1800 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife 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): | |||||