| Water Body Name: | Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
| Water Body ID: | CAE4051200020050203154519 |
| Water Body Type: | Estuary |
DECISION ID |
19935 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Reason for Delisting: | Flaws in original listing |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that the original listing basis is faulty. The guidelines used to evaluate the data used to list this water body for this pollutant originally are not considered to be reliable by the Regional Board. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 535 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | According to the comments submitted by the Los Angeles Regional Board, the guidelines used to evaluate the tissue data used to list this water body for this pollutant originally were not considered to be reliable. At the Board Meeting on 25 October 2006, the Board determined that this listing should be removed as a result of this. | ||||
| 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): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19954 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | ChemA |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Reason for Delisting: | Flaws in original listing |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that the original listing basis is faulty. The guidelines used to evaluate the data used to list this water body for this pollutant originally are not considered to be reliable by the Regional Board. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 536 | ||||
| Pollutant: | ChemA | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | |||||
| Number of Exceedances: | |||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | According to the comments submitted by the Los Angeles Regional Board, the guidelines used to evaluate the tissue data used to list this water body for this pollutant originally were not considered to be reliable. At the Board Meeting on 25 October 2006, the Board determined that this listing should be removed as a result of this. | ||||
| 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): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19789 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chromium (total) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Reason for Delisting: | Other |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for delisting under sections 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.6 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 4.6, there is no significant toxicity associated with this pollutant and the number of pollutant exceedances does not exceed the frequency allowed by the Listing Policy. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The sediment quality guideline used complies, with the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 3. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 4. Four of 93 samples exceeded the Effects Range Medium sediment guideline, and data shows there is not sediment toxicity associated with the pollutant exceedances. This does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 538 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chromium (total) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Four of 93 samples exceed the ERM (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | An Effects Range-Median of 370 ug/g was used (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Ninety-three samples spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between 1994 and 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19177 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Reason for Delisting: | Other |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. In four new individual fact sheets, independently recommended for placement on the 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy, a sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline for the following PAHs: Pyrene, Phenanthrene, Chrysene, and Benzo (a) pyrene. Although sediment toxicity has been observed, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with these specific PAH pollutant concentrations in this water body segment. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing the PAH sediment-pollutant combination and replacing this general PAH listing with the individually listings of Pyrene, Phenanthrene, Chrysene, and Benzo (a) pyrene on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. In the new available data a sufficient number of samples exceeded the specific PAH sediment quality guideline for each PAH. The benthic community impacts may be better linked with the effects of these individual pollutants in the sediment of this water body segment. 2. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met due to other PAHs. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 557 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | This water body pollutant combination is listed on the 2002 section 303(d) list for PAH in sediment. New data sets are now available recommending the listing of the following specific PAHs, Pyrene, Phenanthrene, Chrysene, and Benzo(a)pyrene. The present 303(d) listing for PAH in sediment should therefore be replaced with the specific listings of these PAHs. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19790 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | DDT (tissue & sediment) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under sections 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 of the Listing Policy. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. There is tissue data available showing one sample that far exceeds the OEHHA screening value for DDT. In addition, there is a fish consumption advisory that applies to this water body. Sediment data has been collected in this water body but there is no sediment quality guideline for this pollutant that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for maintaining the listing for this water segment-pollutant combination. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that tissue data showing an exceedance of water quality criteria in conjunction with a fish consumption advisory is enough to maintain the listing of this water body for this pollutant. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 541 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Health Advisories | ||||
| Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A fish consumption advisory has been established for the DDT in the Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor area. The advisory was established by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. | ||||
| 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): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 543 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Forty-three samples are available (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | There is no sediment guideline for this pollutant that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-three samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between 1994 and 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program.
Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 542 | ||||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One fish tissue sample (white croaker) had DDT total level 6,487 ug/kg, which far exceeds the OEHHA screening value (TSMP, 2002). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Toxic pollutants shall not be present at levels that will bioaccumulate in aquatic life to levels which are harmful to aquatic life or human health. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | OEHHA Screening Value: 100 ug/kg (Brodberg and Pollock, 1999). The original listing was based on an EDL and MTRL. The Listing Policy does not allow the use of EDLs or MTRLs in listing or delisting decisions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Station number 405.12.02 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1992. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Toxic Substances Monitoring Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19921 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Lead (tissue) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess delisting status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A large number of sediment 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 removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. 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. Twenty-nine of 93 sediment samples exceeded the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Also the one benthic community sample was of sufficient magnitude to indicate a linkage between pollutant and benthic community impacts. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 548 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 29 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 93 core and grab sediment samples, 29 exceeded the sediment quality guideline (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A Probable Effect Level of 112.18 ug/g was used (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The ninety-three samples were spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between 1994 and 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program
Other quality assurance described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 547 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One tissue sample is available. Mussel watch monitoring data is not available in the water segment (TSMP, 2002). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Toxic pollutants shall not be present at levels that will bioaccumulate in aquatic life to levels which are harmful to aquatic life or human health. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | There is no tissue guideline available for this pollutant that meets the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Listing Policy. The original listing was based on an EDL and MTRL. The Listing Policy does not allow the use of EDLs or MTRLs in listing or delisting decisions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1992. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Toxic Substances Monitoring Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19612 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Copper |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. However under section 3.6 documented pollutant exceedances in sediment must be associated with observed toxicity before listing can occur. 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 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. Eleven of 93 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. However, section 3.6 of the Listing Policy requires that the pollutant in sediment be linked to observed toxicity before placing a water segment on the 303(d) list and only one sample was available showing toxicity which is not enough to list. The Listing Policy requires evidence of observed toxicity to establish a connection between the pollutant in the sediment and toxicity impacts to the aquatic habitat in the water body segment. 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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 539 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | No data are available for the Estuary. The nearest sample location is upstream in the non-tidal portion of Dominguez Channel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxic Rule: Criterion Continuous Concentration is 3.1 ug/L, Criterion Maximum Concentration is 4.8 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | |||||
| Temporal Representation: | |||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 540 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 11 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of the 93 core and grab samples, 11 samples exceed the ERM.(CSTF, 2002). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | An Effect Range-Median of 270 ug/g was used (Long et al., 1995). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Ninety-three samples were collected throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between 1994 and 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program.
Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. |
||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19607 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Mercury |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status of a pollutant in sediment. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on section 3.6 it is unknown if the site has significant sediment toxicity and the pollutant is the likely cause or contributor to the toxic effects. 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 sediment quality guideline used complies with the requirements of section 4.1.3 of the Policy. 2.The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 3.The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 4.None of 44 samples exceeded the sediment guideline, but it unknown if there are any samples exhibiting toxicity and this does not comply with the requirements of the Listing Policy. 5.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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 545 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 44 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 44 sediment core samples, none exceeded the sediment quality guideline. The data are described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database and detailed in the report "Supplemental Report -- Consolidated Slip Restoration Project Concept Plan, October 2003." (CSTF, 2002). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 2.1 ug/g was used (PTI Environmental Services, 1991). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-four samples spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance described in Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
20196 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4100 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine 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 |
20198 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4101 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine 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: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19718 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. Although sediment toxicity has been observed it is not enough to establish a sufficiently strong association with the sediment pollutant concentration. However, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with this pollutant concentration in this water body segment. 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. 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. Eight of 41 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These data exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Based on section 3.9 of the Listing Policy significant benthic impact has been documented and the pollutant in sediment may be linked to the observed impacts. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 546 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)anthracene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 41 sediment core samples, 8 exceeded the sediment quality guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 692.53 ng/g was used (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-one samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance is described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19200 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. Although sediment toxicity has been observed it is not enough to establish a sufficiently strong association with the sediment pollutant concentration. However, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with this pollutant concentration in this water body segment. 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. 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 41 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These data exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Based on section 3.9 of the Listing Policy significant benthic impact has been documented and the pollutant in sediment may be linked to the observed impacts. 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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 551 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benzo(a)pyrene (3,4-Benzopyrene -7-d) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 41 sediment core samples, 7 exceeded the sediment quality guideline (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 763.22 ng/g was used (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-one samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance is described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
20199 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane (tissue) |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4102 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane (tissue) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| 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 |
19296 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. Although sediment toxicity has been observed it is not enough to establish a sufficiently strong association with the sediment pollutant concentration. However, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with this pollutant concentration in this water body segment. 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. 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. Eight of 41 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These data exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Based on section 3.9 of the Listing Policy significant benthic impact has been documented and the pollutant in sediment may be linked to the observed impacts. 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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 552 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chrysene (C1-C4) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 41 sediment core samples, 8 exceeded the sediment quality guideline (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 845.98 ng/g was used (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-one samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance is described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
20200 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Coliform Bacteria |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2007 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4103 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Coliform Bacteria | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| 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 |
20091 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin (tissue) |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4104 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin (tissue) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
| 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 |
19159 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. Although sediment toxicity has been observed it is not enough to establish a sufficiently strong association with the sediment pollutant concentration. However, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with this pollutant concentration in this water body segment. 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. 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. Fifteen of 42 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These data exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Based on section 3.9 of the Listing Policy significant benthic impact has been documented and the pollutant in sediment may be linked to the observed impacts. 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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 556 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
| Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fish tissue analysis | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One fish tissue sample (white croaker collected in 1992) had total PCBs level (1780 ppb wet wt.) that far exceeds the OEHHA screening value (20 ppb). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: Toxic pollutants shall not be present at levels that will bioaccumulate in aquatic life to levels which are harmful to aquatic life or human health. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | OEHHA screening value (20 ppb) (Brodberg & Pollock, 1999). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | TSM Station number 405.12.02 | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Collected in 1992. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | TSM dataset. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 555 | ||||
| Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 42 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 15 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 42 sediment core samples, 15 exceeded the sediment quality guideline (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 400 ng/g was used (Fairey et al., 2001). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-two samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance is described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19515 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Phenanthrene |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. Although sediment toxicity has been observed it is not enough to establish a sufficiently strong association with the sediment pollutant concentration. However, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with this pollutant concentration in this water body segment. 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. 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. Nine of 41 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These data exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Based on section 3.9 of the Listing Policy significant benthic impact has been documented and the pollutant in sediment may be linked to the observed impacts. 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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 553 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phenanthrene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 41 sediment core samples, 9 exceeded the sediment quality guideline (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 543.53 ng/g was used (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-one samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance is described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
19444 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Pyrene |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9 two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A sufficient number of samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. Although sediment toxicity has been observed it is not enough to establish a sufficiently strong association with the sediment pollutant concentration. However, significant benthic degradation has been recorded and this may be linked with this pollutant concentration in this water body segment. 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. 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. Thirteen of 41 samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These data exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Based on section 3.9 of the Listing Policy significant benthic impact has been documented and the pollutant in sediment may be linked to the observed impacts. 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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 550 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Estuarine Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One benthic community sample with a benthic index of 0.21 (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Evaluation of the benthic data were completed using the approaches developed by scientists associated with the BPTCP. The relative benthic index used is a calculated value considering the total fauna, total mollusk species, crustacean species and indicator species at a site. The index ranges from 0 to 1.0. An index value of less than or equal to 0.3 is an indication that pollutants or other factors are negatively impacting the benthic community (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Adjacent waters (Consolidated Slip) also has degraded benthic communities. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program (Stephenson et al., 1994). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 554 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pyrene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 41 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 13 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Chemical monitoring of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Of 41 sediment core samples, 13 exceeded the sediment quality guideline (LARWQCB and CCC, 2004). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: Surface waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | A sediment quality guideline of 1,397.4 ng/g was used (MacDonald et al., 1996). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Forty-one samples are spread throughout the water body. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2002. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Quality assurance is described in the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
28822 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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. Four of seven samples exceed the were deemed either moderately or highly toxic and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Three surface sediment results showed elevated lead and zinc bulk sediment levels. These two pollutants are already included on the 303d list thus a connection exists between the pollutant in sediment and toxicity impacts to the aquatic habitat in the water body. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 549 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One toxicity sample that showed 61 percent survival which is considered toxic (Anderson et al., 1998). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan: All waters should be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological response in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Samples were considered toxic if (1) there was a significant difference in mean organism response between the sample and the control, and (2) the mean organism response in the test, as a percent of the control, was less than the threshold based on the 90th percentile minimum significant difference value. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | One station at H. Ford Bridge (BPTCP station 47010.0). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in 1996. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Bay Protection and Toxic Cleanup Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 28531 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sediment Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Migration | Fish Spawning | Marine Habitat | Preservation of Rare & Endangered Species | Wildlife Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Toxicity testing of sediments | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Four of seven sediment samples were deemed either moderately or highly toxic and associated with elevated lead and zinc concentrations in bulk sediment. One sediment toxicity evaluation was performed and results suggested that organophosphate compounds might also be contributing to bulk toxicity. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey Data | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan states that, "[a]ll waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Basin Plan Amendments to the Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region Basin Plan 1997-2009 | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Bay et. al. classifies sediment toxicity based on the following survival percentages: Non toxic if greater than or equal to 80% survival; moderately toxic if between 50 to 80% survival; and highly toxic if less than 50% survival. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Southern California Bight 1998 Regional Monitoring Program. Volume IV. Sediment Toxicity. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | A total of seven stations were monitored in the Dominguez Channel Estuary which include the following stations:
4206 (Lat: 33.80811, Long: -118.22845), 4270 (Lat: 33.82, Long: -118.24123), 4436 (Lat: 33.80914, Long: -118.22876), 4852 (Lat: 33.80311, Long: -118.22758), 5012 (Lat: 33.8159333333, Long: -118.23618), BRI-04 (Lat: 33.7705322266, Long: -118.250032552), and BRI-05 (Lat: 33.7749674479, Long: -118.244938151). |
||||
| Temporal Representation: | Composite surface sediment samples were taken on 08/08/2003 for stations 4206, 4270, and 4436, on 09/17/2003 for stations 4852 and 5012, on 07/14/2003 for stations BRI-04 and BRI-05, and on 08/06/03 for station BRI-04. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data was collected in compliance with the sampling and monitoring procedures detailed in Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey Quality Assurance Manual. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Southern California Bight 2003 Regional Marine Monitoring Survey (Bight 03) Quality Assurance Manual | ||||
DECISION ID |
20202 |
Region 4 |
Dominguez Channel Estuary (unlined portion below Vermont Ave) |
||
| Pollutant: | Zinc (sediment) |
| 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)(2010) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
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: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle. |
| State Board Staff Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | Region 4 data was not included in the 2012 Integrated Report so all decisions are carried over from the 2010 listing cycle.
After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4105 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc (sediment) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine 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): | |||||