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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 9 - San Diego Region

Water Body Name: Moosa Canyon Creek
Water Body ID: CAR9031300020081210154123
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
16312
Region 9     
Moosa Canyon Creek
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen
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: 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. Four of the four samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for nitrogen. A minimum of five samples is needed to apply table 3.2.

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. Four of the four samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for nitrogen and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 16312, Nitrogen
Region 9     
Moosa Canyon Creek
 
LOE ID: 26212
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 4
Number of Exceedances: 4
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: All four samples collected at Moosa Creek station 2, (903SLMSA2) show excessive nitrogen concentrations. (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference: Monitoring data for Region 9
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water bodies shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growth to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses (RWQCB, 2007).

A desired goal in order to prevent plant nuisance in streams and other flowing waters appears to be 0.1 mg/L total phosphorus, P. These values are not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time unless studies of the specific water body in question clearly show that water quality objective changes are permissible and changes are approved by the Regional Board. Analogous threshold values have not been set for nitrogen compounds; however, natural ratios of nitrogen to phosphorus are to be determined by surveillance and monitoring and upheld. If data are lacking, a ratio of N:P = 10:1, on a weight to weight basis shall be used (RWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Water Samples were collected at Moosa Creek station 2, 903SLMSA2; (Latitude 33.2862, Longitude -117.2092).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected in May 2004, September 2004, March 2005, and April 2005.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality control for the chemical analysis portion of this study was conducted in accordance with the California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2002. Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. California Department of Fish and Game, Monterey, CA
 
 
DECISION ID
16316
Region 9     
Moosa Canyon Creek
 
Pollutant: Phosphorus
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: 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. Four of the four samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for phosphorus as P.

Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy requires a minimum of five samples to make an assessment.

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. Four of the four samples exceed the Basin Plan water quality objective for phosphorus as P and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 16316, Phosphorus
Region 9     
Moosa Canyon Creek
 
LOE ID: 26211
 
Pollutant: Phosphorus
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Not Recorded
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 4
Number of Exceedances: 4
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: All four samples collected at Moosa Creek station 2, (903SLMSA2) show excessive phosphorus concentrations. (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference: Monitoring data for Region 9
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Inland surface waters, bays and estuaries and coastal lagoon waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growth to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses.

For inland surface waters-streams and other flowing waters, with all beneficial uses, the water quality objective for total phosphorus is 0.1 mg/L. This appears to be the desired goal in order to prevent plant nuisance in streams and other flowing waters; not to be exceeded more than 10% of the time (RWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Water Samples were collected at Moosa Creek station 2,903SLMSA2; (Latitude 33.2862, Longitude -117.2092).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected in May 2004, September 2004, March 2005, and April 2005.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality control for the chemical analysis portion of this study was conducted in accordance with the California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2002. Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. California Department of Fish and Game, Monterey, CA
 
 
DECISION ID
16317
Region 9     
Moosa Canyon Creek
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
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: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of three of the samples exceed the water quality objective for toxicity.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. One of three of the samples exceed the water quality objective for toxicity and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
USEPA Action (if applicable):
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 16317, Toxicity
Region 9     
Moosa Canyon Creek
 
LOE ID: 26213
 
Pollutant: Toxicity
LOE Subgroup: Toxicity
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: Ambient toxicity testing (chronic)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: One of the three samples collected at Moosa Creek station 2(903SLMSA2) showed significant toxicity levels (SL) to the Green alga, Selenastrum Capricornutum, growth test method. None of the samples showed significant toxicity to Ceriodaphnia dubia.
Data Reference: Monitoring data for Region 9
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the Basin Plan, all waters shall be free of toxic substances that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (RWQCB, 2007).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin
 
Evaluation Guideline: According to SWAMP, waters are considered toxic when samples show significant toxicity levels (SWAMP code ‘SL’) when compared to a negative control. Significant toxicity is determined when statistical tests result in an alpha of less than 5% and percent control values less than the evaluation threshold.
Guideline Reference: Monitoring data for Region 9
 
Spatial Representation: Water Samples were collected at Moosa Creek station 2 (903SLMSA2); (Latitude 33.2862, Longitude -117.2092).
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected in May 2004, September 2004, March 2005, and April 2005.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality control of this study was conducted in accordance with the California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program.
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2002. Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. California Department of Fish and Game, Monterey, CA