Draft 2008 California 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report

Supporting Information

Regional Board 2 - San Francisco Bay Region

Water Body Name: Codornices Creek
Water Body ID: CAR2033001120080624162950
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
9437
 
Pollutant: Low Dissolved Oxygen
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
 
Weight of Evidence: One line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this water body.

Based on the readily available data for this water body, 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 satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.

2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.

3. Dissolved oxygen measurements at 11 continuous deployments exceeded the applicable water quality objectives on three occasions for waters designated as warm water habitat and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.

4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that there is insufficient information to demonstrate that this water body is not meeting applicable water quality standards for dissolved oxygen to support the warm freshwater habitat beneficial use. Therefore, the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9437
 
LOE ID: 8687
 
Pollutant: Low Dissolved Oxygen
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
Aquatic Life Use: Wildlife Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 11
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Data used to evaluate dissolved oxygen was collected by SWAMP in 2004. In 3 out of 11 seasonal deployments, minimum dissolved oxygen levels fell below the objective of 5 mg/L. The three deployments where this occurred were dry season deployments in the lower and mid-watershed.
Data Reference: Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The numeric water quality objective for dissolved oxygen is 5.0 mg/L minimum for waters designated as warm freshwater habitat. The median dissolved oxygen concentration for any three consecutive months shall not be less than 80 percent of the dissolved oxygen content at saturation.
Objective/Criterion Reference: San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Dissolved oxygen was measured at three sites spanning lower to upper watershed locations on this creek.
Temporal Representation: The SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of dissolved oxygen at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1-2 weeks in two dry seasons and one wet season in 2004.
Environmental Conditions: The Codornices Creek watershed is highly urbanized, and large portions of the original waterways have been altered or placed in culverts. The creek flows from headwaters in the western slopes of the East Bay ridge, through East Bay cities, into the eastern side of the SF Bay. Sites monitored represent mostly urban land use. The creek is spring fed to a limited extent. However, the adjacent cities often contribute dry weather flows, rendering the creek wet year round.
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
9163
 
Pollutant: Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Sources: Channelization | Habitat Modification | Removal of Riparian Vegetation
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Weight of Evidence: This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data for this water body, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification available in favor of adding 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. The data concerning current conditions and supporting the listing decision were collected as part of the SWAMP and satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.

2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.

3. Temperature measurements at 6 out of 11 continuous deployments exceeded the 17 °C evaluation guideline used to interpret the water quality objective for waters designated as cold water habitat and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.

4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be added to the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9163
 
LOE ID: 8555
 
Pollutant: Temperature, water
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 11
Number of Exceedances: 6
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water quality assessment was conducted at the Codornices Creek watershed as part of SWAMP study in 2004-2005. Continuous field monitoring at 15 minute increments of temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH and specific conductance was conducted to determine temporal variability in basic water quality at three locations.

Continuous monitoring sondes were deployed 11 times at 3 monitoring locations during wet, spring and two dry seasons. The measured temperatures ranged from 8.9°C to 21.5 °C and varied with season and location. During both dry season deployments at all 3 monitoring locations the 7-day mean temperature threshold for steelhead was exceeded. In total, the 17 °C criterion was exceeded in 6 out of 11 deployments. The durations of the temperature exceedances ranged from 19 to over 125 hours.
Data Reference: Data collected by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Years 4 and 5 Assessment
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Temperature objectives for enclosed bays and estuaries are specified in the 'Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and Enclosed Bays of California' including any revisions to the plan. In addition, the following temperature objectives apply to surface waters: The natural receiving water temperature of intrastate waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Water Board that such alteration in temperature does not adversely affect beneficial uses.
The temperature of any cold or warm freshwater habitat shall not be increased by more than 5°F (2.8°C) above natural receiving water temperature.
Objective/Criterion Reference: San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Sullivan et al. (2000) reviewed a wide range of studies incorporating information from laboratory-based research, field observations, and risk assessment approaches and developed criteria for assessing temperature risk to aquatic life. The 7-day mean temperature (maximum value of the 7-day moving average of the daily mean temperature) of 14.8°C was established as the upper threshold criterion for coho salmon and 17.0°C for steelhead trout. The risk assessment approach used by Sullivan et al. (2000) suggests that temperatures exceeding the above thresholds will cause 10% reduction in average fish growth compared to optimal conditions.
Guideline Reference: An Analysis of the Effects of Temperature on Salmonids of the Pacific Northwest with Implications for Selecting Temperature Criteria
 
Spatial Representation: Temperature was measured at three sites located on the mainstem of Codornices Creek that are representative of the entire creek length. The highest temperatures were recorded at the most downstream monitoring station in September 2004.
Temporal Representation: In 2004 and 2005 the SWAMP Program performed continuous monitoring of temperature at 15 minute intervals for periods of 1-2 weeks in each of three different seasons: winter (3 sites), spring (2 sites), and two summer dry seasons (3 sites each season).
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: All samples were collected and analyzed using procedures comparable with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (SWRCB 2002).
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
7637
 
Pollutant: Trash
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Sources: Illegal dumping | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Weight of Evidence: 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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The line of evidence consists of data from field visits/trash surveys conducted according to the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) methodology.

Based on the readily available 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 threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) on three different dates.

3. This waterbody is considered impaired by trash because there were exceedances of the evaluation guideline (poor condition category for the trash assessment metric) in more than one location or on more than one date.


4. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
5. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1 of the Policy.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, Water Board staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not met and trash contributes to or causes the problem.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7637
 
LOE ID: 5366
 
Pollutant: Trash
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix: Not Specified
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Wildlife Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 4
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
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 March, July, and November 2004 according to the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology. There were exceedances of the evaluation guideline (poor condition category for the trash assessment metric) in more than one location or on more than one date.
Data Reference: A Rapid Trash Assessment Method Applied to Waters of the San Francisco Bay Region:Trash Measurement in Streams
  Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) data collected by the SF Bay Region Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program from 2002-2005 and method description
 
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: San Francisco Bay Basin (Region 2) Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan)
 
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 one location in 2004. This location scored in the poor condition category for the threat to aquatic life parameter.
Temporal Representation: RTA data were collected for this waterbody in March, July, and November in 2004. Data from all three months scored in the poor condition category for the threat to aquatic life parameter.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: For RTA trash assessment data to be considered, the data must have been collected by field operators that have received a 2-hour training in the Rapid Trash Assessment methodology.
QAPP Information Reference(s):