Draft California 2020 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 9 - San Diego Region

Water Body Name:	Spring Valley Creek
Water Body ID:	CAR9091200020110812135958
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	130820	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Dimethoate
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130820, Dimethoate	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

227631

Pollutant:

Dimethoate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality threshold for Dimethoate.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in the water column, sediments or biota at concentration(s) that adversely affect beneficial uses. Pesticides shall not be present at levels which will bioaccumulate in aquatic organisms to levels which are harmful to human health, wildlife or aquatic organisms (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [909SWT07 - Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	130797	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Ethoprop
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130797, Ethoprop	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

227632

Pollutant:

Ethoprop

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality threshold Ethoprop.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [909SWT07 - Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	130819	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Methidathion
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130819, Methidathion	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

227635

Pollutant:

Methidathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Methidathion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.66 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [909SWT07 - Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	130821	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Phorate
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130821, Phorate	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

227691

Pollutant:

Phorate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [909SWT07 - Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	130794	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Phosmet
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)(2018)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 130794, Phosmet	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

227692

Pollutant:

Phosmet

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The evaluation guideline for Phosmet is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for a invertebrate (acute).

Guideline Reference:

OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [909SWT07 - Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	82830	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Arsenic
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line(s) of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the three samples exceed the criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of three samples exceeded the criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 82830, Arsenic	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77114

Pollutant:

Arsenic

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 0.150 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	82831	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of zero samples exceeded the guideline. The samples were not used in the assessment due to reporting limits that were higher than the guideline. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 82831, Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

78185

Pollutant:

Azinphos-methyl (Guthion)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos methyl.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan,San Diego Basin).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for Azinphos Methyl (Guthion) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is a maximum of 0.01 ug/l.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	84121	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Cadmium
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. None of the samples exceeded the criterion and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84121, Cadmium	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77115

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego DWM data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd., Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/24/2003-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84121, Cadmium	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77116

Pollutant:

Cadmium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego Dept. of Public Works data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

All 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. California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd. - 909SWT07]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	83990	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of zero samples exceeded the guideline. The samples were not used in the assessment due to reporting limits that were higher than the guideline. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83990, Chlorpyrifos	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77119

Pollutant:

Chlorpyrifos

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in the water column, sediments or biota at concentration(s) that adversely affect beneficial uses (Water Quality Control Plan, San Diego Basin).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The freshwater criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic organisms is 0.015 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game (with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005).

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle, Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 9/26/2005-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.


DECISION ID	84245	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Chromium
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of three samples exceeded the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of the three samples did not exceed the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84245, Chromium	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77120

Pollutant:

Chromium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd. - 909SWT07]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	84285	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the beneficial use guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of 15 samples exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84285, Copper	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77122

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd. - 909SWT07]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84285, Copper	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77121

Pollutant:

Copper

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego DWM data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 12 samples exceed the criterion for Copper.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd., Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/24/2003-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.


DECISION ID	84123	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Diazinon
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. None of the samples exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84123, Diazinon	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

78187

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The freshwater chronic value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84123, Diazinon	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77128

Pollutant:

Diazinon

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The freshwater chronic value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004).

Guideline Reference:

Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle, Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 9/26/2005-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.


DECISION ID	84164	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Disulfoton
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The one sample did not exceed the beneficial use guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. The one sample did not exceed the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84164, Disulfoton	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77944

Pollutant:

Disulfoton

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Disulfoton.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for disulfoton is 0.05 µg/L (US EPA 1973 guidance)..

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	84134	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the Three samples exceed the single objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of three samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84134, Indicator Bacteria	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77129

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Non-Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

In waters designated for non contact recreation (REC 2), the fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed 4000 MPN/100 ml (Basin Plan).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	83820	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Lead
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of 15 samples exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83820, Lead	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77135

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd. - 909SWT07]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83820, Lead	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77136

Pollutant:

Lead

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego DWM data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Lead.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd., Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/24/2003-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.


DECISION ID	84041	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Malathion
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of 12 samples exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84041, Malathion	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77137

Pollutant:

Malathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Malathion.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for malathion is 0.1 µg/L.

Guideline Reference:

2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle, Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 9/26/2005-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84041, Malathion	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

78188

Pollutant:

Malathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Malathion.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for malathion is 0.1 µg/L.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	84203	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Methyl Parathion
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The one sample did not exceed the beneficial use guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. The one sample did not exceed the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84203, Methyl Parathion	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77950

Pollutant:

Methyl Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Methyl.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan,San Diego Basin).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The California Department of Fish and Game instantaneous criteria for Methyl Parathion is 0.08 ug/L.

Guideline Reference:

Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Environmental Services Division. Administrative Report 92-1

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	83863	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Nickel
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of three samples did not exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. One of three samples did not exceed the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83863, Nickel	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77141

Pollutant:

Nickel

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd. - 909SWT07]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	84078	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Parathion
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the zero samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of zero samples exceeded the guideline. The samples were not used in the assessment due to reporting limits that were higher than the guideline. The sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 84078, Parathion	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77951

Pollutant:

Parathion

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Ethyl.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin

Evaluation Guideline:

The criterion continuous concentration for Parathion, Ethyl is 0.013 ug/l from the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria.

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected on a single day 3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	83952	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Selenium
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of three samples exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. One of three samples exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 83952, Selenium	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77142

Pollutant:

Selenium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium.

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd.]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.


DECISION ID	100637	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

Pollutant:	Zinc
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)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the beneficial use guidelines. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA 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. Zero of 15 samples exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 100637, Zinc	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77146

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

Data for Nutrients from the County of San Diego Southern Watersheds, 2008-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd. - 909SWT07]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 7/31/2008-3/31/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the CRG Marine Laboratories and Southern Watersheds Report.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 100637, Zinc	Region 9
Spring Valley Creek

LOE ID:

77145

Pollutant:

Zinc

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed County of San Diego DWM data for Spring Valley Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc.

Data Reference:

Data for Metals, Nutrients, Inorganics, Organics, Pathogens, and Pesticides from the County of San Diego, 2003-2009.

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Data for this line of evidence for Spring Valley Creek was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Drainage Channel @ Quarry Rd. & Swap Meet Rd., Spring Valley Creek @ Valencia Street/Kings View Circle]

Temporal Representation:

Data was collected over the time period 6/24/2003-6/16/2009.

Environmental Conditions:

Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.

QAPP Information:

The Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8 was followed.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Project Plan from the Truesdail Laboratories, Rev. 12, Enviromatrix Analytical and Dry Weather Monitoring Program Rev. 8.