Final California 2010 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 2 - San Francisco Bay Region

Water Body Name: San Francisquito Creek
Water Body ID: CAR2055004019980929144005
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
7655
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
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
 
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.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Both lines of evidence rely on data from field visits/trash surveys conducted according to the Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) methodology developed by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program (SCVURPPP).

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 Urban 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 different four locations and on four different dates. This waterbody also had transportable, Persistent, Buoyant Litter parameter scores in the marginal urban and poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at four different locations and on three different dates.

3. 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.

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.
 
Regional Board Decision 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.
 
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.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable): USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7655, Trash
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 5537
 
Pollutant: Trash
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix: Not Specified
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Wildlife Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 23
Number of Exceedances: 5
 
Data and Information Type: Occurrence of conditions judged to cause impairment
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Data results were obtained through application of the Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) methodology, developed by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program. The URTA is a modification of the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) developed by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The URTA method 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 transportable, persistent, buoyant litter (relating to WILD) assessment parameters were considered for the listing determination. These results are available for field visits/trash surveys conducted in February 2005, July 2005, May 2006, October 2006, May 2007, September 2007, and October 2007 according to the Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) methodology. This waterbody had transportable, Persistent, Buoyant Litter parameter scores in the marginal urban and poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at four different locations and on three different dates.
Data Reference: Memo: Development of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment Protocol. March 13, 2006
  Spreadsheet of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) data collected by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program, 2004-2007
 
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 URTA Parameter 3 (Transportable, Persistent, Buoyant Litter) is in the marginal urban or poor condition category (scores 0-10), then WILD is not supported. The URTA defines marginal urban or poor condition for this parameter as follows. this level of trash is a medium prevalence (76-200 pieces) or large amount (>200 pieces) of transportable, persistent, buoyant litter such as: hard or soft plastics, styrofoam, balloons, cigarette butts. These types of items are all detrimental to aquatic life.
Guideline Reference: Memo: Development of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment Protocol. March 13, 2006
 
Spatial Representation: URTA data were collected for this waterbody in six locations from 2004 through 2006.
Temporal Representation: URTA data were collected for this waterbody on seven separate dates, 2004 through 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data were collected by trained staff in accordance with URTA methodology developed by SCVURPPP and are deemed reliable and of sufficient quality on which to base listing determinations.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 7655, Trash
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 5538
 
Pollutant: Trash
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix: Not Specified
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Non-Contact Recreation
 
Number of Samples: 23
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 of the Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) methodology, developed by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program. The URTA is a modification of the Rapid Trash Assessment (RTA) developed by the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). The URTA method 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 transportable, persistent, buoyant litter (relating to WILD) assessment parameters were considered for the listing determination. These results are available for field visits/trash surveys conducted in February 2005, July 2005, May 2006, October 2006, May 2007, September 2007, and October 2007 according to the Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) methodology. This waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at different four locations and on four different dates.
Data Reference: Memo: Development of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment Protocol. March 13, 2006
  Spreadsheet of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) data collected by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program, 2004-2007
 
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 Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) Parameter 1 (Level of Trash) is in the poor condition category (scores 0-5), REC2 is not supported. The URTA defines poor condition for this parameter as a level of trash that distracts the eye on first glance. Stream, bank surfaces, and immediate riparian zone contain substantial levels of litter and debris. Evidence of site being used frequently by people: many cans, bottles, and food wrappers, blankets, clothing.
Guideline Reference: Memo: Development of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment Protocol. March 13, 2006
 
Spatial Representation: URTA data were collected for this waterbody in six locations from 2004 through 2006.
Temporal Representation: URTA data were collected for this waterbody on seven separate dates, 2004 through 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Data were collected by trained staff in accordance with URTA methodology developed by SCVURPPP and are deemed reliable and of sufficient quality on which to base listing determinations.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
4303
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
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)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 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. Very few of the measurements exceeded the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
2. Three of 142 samples exceeded the dissolved oxygen water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
3. 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: No new data were assessed for 2008. 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.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4303, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 1809
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 142
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: DO values recorded in parts per million (equal to mg/l). Of the 142 readings, only 3 exceeded the Basin Plan objective (SFEI, 1998)..
Data Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: 5.0 mg/liter, Basin Plan Objective.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Three stations.
Temporal Representation: Samples taken over 143 weeks, October 1992 to January 1997. Samples taken consistently in morning (e.g., 8:00 AM).
Environmental Conditions: Information recorded on air temperature, water temperature, rainfall, weather conditions, water appearance (e.g., turbidity), stream depth, and flow rates (visual information).
QAPP Information: QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
4306
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
Pollutant: Turbidity
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)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 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. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of 58 samples exceeded the turbidity water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: No new data were assessed for 2008. 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.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4306, Turbidity
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 1811
 
Pollutant: Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 58
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Fifty-eight total readings. 0 total "exceedances" of Basin Plan objective. (SFEI, 1998).
Data Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Basin Plan Objective: Increases from normal background light penetration or turbidity relatable to waste discharge shall not be greater than 10 percent in areas where natural turbidity is greater than 50 NTU.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Percentage over 50 (NTU standard) were measured.
Guideline Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
Spatial Representation: One station.
Temporal Representation: Samples taken over 143 weeks, October 1992 to January 1997. Samples taken consistently in morning (e.g., 8:00 AM).
Environmental Conditions: Information recorded on air temperature, water temperature, rainfall, weather conditions, water appearance (e.g., related to turbidity), stream depth, and flow rates (visual information).
QAPP Information: QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
4305
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
Pollutant: pH
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 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 small number of samples exceed the water quality objective.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Seven of 143 samples exceeded the pH water quality objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency calculated using the equations in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
3. 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: No new data were assessed for 2008. 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.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 4305, pH
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 1810
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 143
Number of Exceedances: 7
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Seven of 143 samples exceeded the objective. (SFEI, 1998).
Data Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The pH of inland surface waters shall not be raised above 8.5 or depressed below 6.5 as a result of controllable water quality factors (SFBRWQCB, 1995)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Spatial representation is unknown.
Temporal Representation: Samples taken over 143 weeks, October 1992 to January 1997. Samples taken consistently in morning (e.g., 8:00 AM).
Environmental Conditions: Information recorded on air temperature, water temperature, rainfall, weather conditions, water appearance (e.g., turbidity), stream depth, and flow rates (visual information).
QAPP Information: QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
 
DECISION ID
6457
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
Pollutant: Sedimentation/Siltation
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Nonpoint Source
Expected TMDL Completion Date: 2013
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.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: No new data were assessed for 2008. 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.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable): USEPA approved the listing of this water body as a water quality limited segment requiring a TMDL for this pollutant.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6457, Sedimentation/Siltation
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 3852
 
Pollutant: Sedimentation/Siltation
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Not Recorded
 
Beneficial Use: Cold 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 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):
 
 
DECISION ID
6866
Region 2     
San Francisquito 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)(2006)
Revision Status Original
Sources: Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers
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: No new data were assessed for 2008. The decision has not changed. The water body should remain in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed category of the section 303(d) list because the TMDL approved by USEPA and the implementation plan are in place.
 
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.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 6866, Diazinon
Region 2     
San Francisquito Creek
 
LOE ID: 1812
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold 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):