| Pollutant: |
Ammonia |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Regional Board Conclusion: |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Arsenic |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Cadmium |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Copper |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Regional Board Conclusion: |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Lead |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Regional Board Conclusion: |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Mercury |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Regional Board Conclusion: |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Nickel |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| Regional Board Conclusion: |
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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 149191, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)
|
Region 8 |
Poppy Street to Southeast Regional Boundary (Nearshore Zone) |
|
| |
| LOE ID: |
238043 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
2 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Poppy Street to Southeast Regional Boundary (Nearshore Zone) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total PAHs. |
| Data Reference: |
Field, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
| |
| SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 30-day average concentration of 0.0088 ug/L for PAHs to protect human health in marine waters. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 12-351 (IRV007 Receiving Water). |
| Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-11-01 and 2014-12-12 |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. 2008. Assessing Natural Water Quality In Areas Of Special Biological Significance. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Assessing Natural Water Quality In
Areas Of Special Biological Significance |
| |
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 149191, PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons)
|
Region 8 |
Poppy Street to Southeast Regional Boundary (Nearshore Zone) |
|
| |
| LOE ID: |
238044 |
| |
| Pollutant: |
PAHs (Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons) |
| LOE Subgroup: |
Pollutant-Water |
| Matrix: |
Water |
| Fraction: |
Total |
| |
| Beneficial Use: |
Shellfish Harvesting |
| |
| Number of Samples: |
2 |
| Number of Exceedances: |
0 |
| |
| Data and Information Type: |
PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING |
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: |
Water Board staff assessed ASBS Regional Reference Site Monitoring data for Poppy Street to Southeast Regional Boundary (Nearshore Zone) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total PAHs. |
| Data Reference: |
Field, WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 8. |
| |
| SWAMP Data: |
Non-SWAMP |
| |
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: |
California's Ocean Plan, Table 3 lists the 30-day average concentration of 0.0088 ug/L for PAHs to protect human health in marine waters. |
| Objective/Criterion Reference: |
SWRCB. 2005. Water Quality Control Plan, Ocean Waters of California (Ocean Plan). California Environmental Protection Agency, State Water Resources Control Board. February 2, 2019 |
| |
| Evaluation Guideline: |
|
| Guideline Reference: |
| |
| Spatial Representation: |
The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: 12-351 (IRV007 Receiving Water). |
| Temporal Representation: |
The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-11-01 and 2014-12-12 |
| Environmental Conditions: |
|
| QAPP Information: |
Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. 2008. Assessing Natural Water Quality In Areas Of Special Biological Significance. |
| QAPP Information Reference(s): |
Assessing Natural Water Quality In
Areas Of Special Biological Significance |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Selenium |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Silver |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |
| Pollutant: |
Zinc |
| Final Listing Decision: |
Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: |
New Decision |
| Revision Status |
Revised |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: |
Pollutant |
| |
| 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 the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| |
| |