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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 9 - San Diego Region

Water Body Name: Paleta Creek
Water Body ID: CAR9083100020080825092823
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
16901
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
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: 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for arsenic.

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 three samples exceeded the arsenic water quality objective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16901
 
LOE ID: 7160
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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 3 samples exceed the water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR the Arsenic water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 340 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 150 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16904
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
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: 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for cadmium.

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 the three samples exceeded the cadmium water quality objective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16904
 
LOE ID: 7162
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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 exceed the water quality objective from results in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Cadmium water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 4.3 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 2.2 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16907
 
Pollutant: Chromium (total)
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: 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 the three 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. One of three samples exceeded the chromium water quality obective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16907
 
LOE ID: 7164
 
Pollutant: Chromium (total)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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: One of three samples exceeded the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Chromium water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 16 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 11 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2007.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16911
 
Pollutant: Nickel
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: 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for Nickel.

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 three samples exceeded the Nickel water quality objective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16911
 
LOE ID: 7172
 
Pollutant: Nickel
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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 exceed the chronic water quality objectives as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Nickel water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 460 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 52 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16912
 
Pollutant: Selenium
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: 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for selenium.

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 three samples exceeded the selenium water quality objective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16912
 
LOE ID: 7167
 
Pollutant: Selenium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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 chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Selenium water quality objective for continuous freshwater concentration is 5.0 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16913
 
Pollutant: Silver
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: 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for silver.

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 three samples exceeded the silver water quality objective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16913
 
LOE ID: 7170
 
Pollutant: Silver
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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 single sample exceed the acute water quality as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Silver water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 3.4 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2007.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16914
 
Pollutant: Zinc
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: 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective for zinc.

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 samples exceeded the zinc water quality objective 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16914
 
LOE ID: 7171
 
Pollutant: Zinc
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
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: One of three samples exceed the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the zinc water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 120 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 120 ug/L
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2007.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16909
 
Pollutant: Copper
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Sources: Unknown Nonpoint Source | Unknown Point Source | 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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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. All three of the samples exceed the water quality objective for copper.

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 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. All three samples exceed the copper water quality objective and this exceeds 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16909
 
LOE ID: 7166
 
Pollutant: Copper
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: All three samples exceeded the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Copper water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 14 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 9 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
 
DECISION ID
16910
 
Pollutant: Lead
Final Listing Decision: List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Sources: Other Urban Runoff | Unknown Nonpoint Source | Unknown Point Source
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 3.1 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. All three 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 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 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 samples exceed the lead water quality objective and this exceeds 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.
 
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
 
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
 
USEPA Decision:
 
 
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 16910
 
LOE ID: 7168
 
Pollutant: Lead
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 3
Number of Exceedances: 3
 
Data and Information Type: Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: All three samples exceed the chronic water quality objective as outlined in Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, May 2007.
Data Reference: Monitoring and Modeling of Chollas, Switzer, and Paleta Creek, Southern California Coastal Water Research Project.
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: From the CTR, the Lead water quality objective for maximum freshwater concentration is 82 ug/L and continuous freshwater concentration is 3 ug/L (U.S. EPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants for the State of California; Rule. 40 CFR Part 131. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, Water Division, San Francisco, CA.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Samples were collected at 1 monitoring station on Paleta Creek.
Temporal Representation: Samples were collected during 3 storm events in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QA/QC conducted according to 40 CFR 136.
QAPP Information Reference(s):