| Water Body Name: | Coyote Creek (Santa Clara Co.) |
| Water Body ID: | CAR2053002119990218112824 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 7659 |
| LOE ID: | 5401 |
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance |
| Matrix: | Not Specified |
| Fraction: | None |
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife Habitat |
| Number of Samples: | 4 |
| 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 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 four locations in October 2004 and March 2005 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 locations and on two 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 | |
| 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 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 four locations in 2004 and 2005. |
| Temporal Representation: | URTA data were collected for this waterbody on two separate dates, October 2004 and March 2005. |
| 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): | |
| | |
| LOE ID: | 5404 |
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance |
| Matrix: | Not Specified |
| Fraction: | None |
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation |
| 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 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.
This waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at four locations and on a single date. 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. These results are available for field visits/trash surveys conducted in October 2004 and March 2005 at four separate locations according to the Urban Rapid Trash Assessment (URTA) methodology. |
| 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 | |
| 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 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 four locations in 2004 and 2005. |
| Temporal Representation: | URTA data were collected for this waterbody on two separate dates, October 2004 and March 2005. |
| 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): | |
| | |
| LOE ID: | 5406 |
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance |
| Matrix: | Not Specified |
| Fraction: | None |
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation |
| Number of Samples: | 10 |
| Number of Exceedances: | 9 |
| 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:
Williams Street on 2/21/2005 Various locations on 2/3/2006 Between Montague Expressway and Highway 237 on 2/14/2007 Downstream of Highway 280 on 5/22/2005 At San Antonio St. on 4/27/2005 At Santa Clara St. on 5/20/2006 At the Julian St. Bridge on 3/24/2002, 5/6/2006, and 1/21/2007 At Mabry Rd. on 2/1/2004, and 5/6/2006. This waterbody had level of trash parameter scores in the poor category (indicating impairment of non-contact water recreational beneficial uses) at six locations on eight 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 Coyote Creek submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | |
| 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. 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: | Memo: Development of Urban Rapid Trash Assessment Protocol. March 13, 2006 |
| Spatial Representation: | Photographic evidence was analyzed using the RTA methodology for this waterbody for 8 different locations spanning dates from 2002 through 2007. |
| Temporal Representation: | Photographic evidence was collected for this waterbody on nine separate dates from 2002 through 2007. |
| 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: | 5405 |
| Pollutant: | Trash |
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Nuisance |
| Matrix: | Not Specified |
| Fraction: | None |
| Beneficial Use: | Wildlife Habitat |
| Number of Samples: | 10 |
| Number of Exceedances: | 10 |
| 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:
Williams Street on 2/21/2005 Various locations on 2/3/2006 Between Montague Expressway and Highway 237 on 2/14/2007 Downstream of Highway 280 on 5/22/2005 At San Antonio St. on 4/27/2005 At Santa Clara St. on 5/20/2006 At the Julian St. Bridge on 3/24/2002, 5/6/2006, and 1/21/2007 At Mabry Rd. on 2/1/2004, and 5/6/2006 . This waterbody also had threat to aquatic life parameter scores in the poor category (indicating threat to Wildlife Habitat beneficial uses) at seven different locations on nine 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 Coyote Creek submitted for 2008 303(d) list consideration | |
| 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. 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 8 different locations spanning dates from 2002 through 2007. |
| Temporal Representation: | Photographic evidence was collected for this waterbody on nine separate dates from 2002 through 2007. |
| 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): | |