HomeMy WebLinkAboutS25 - Organochlorine Compounds TMDLCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. S25
February 27, 2007
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: City Manager's Office
Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager
9491644 -3002 ordkiff @city.newport- beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: Support for the Regional Board's Proposed Adoption of the
Organochlorine Compounds ( "OC ") TMDL
ISSUE:
How should the City react to a proposal by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board (Santa Ana Region) to adopt a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for
Organochlorine Compounds (like DDT and PCBs)?
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the Mayor to sign the attached letter in support of the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board's pending adoption of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
for Organochlorine Compounds ( "OC ").
DISCUSSION:
About TMDLs. Newport Bay is an impaired water body per §303(d) of the federal Clean
Water Act (CWA). As such, the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) and the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) via the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (Regional Board) are directed to prepare "total
maximum daily loads" (TMDLs) to eliminate the impairment.
A TMDL is a both a daily limit on how much of a pollutant can enter an impaired water
body and an implementation plan to eliminate the impairment within a certain amount of
time. Newport Bay is listed on the §303(d) List for the following substances:
• Sediment
• Nutrients
• Fecal Coliform bacteria
• Toxic Pollutants
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 2
Here is what the TMDLs specifically tell us to do:
Sediment. Local partners (stakeholders in the watershed) must survey the Bay regularly
and reduce annual sediment coming into the Bay from 250,000 cubic yards to 125,000 cubic
yards (a 50% reduction) by 2008. The TMDL's goal is to reduce significant dredging events
in the Upper Bay to not more frequently than once every 21 years. The current UNB
Ecosystem Restoration Project (UNB ERP) is also mandated by the TMDL to get the UNB
back into compliance with correct capacity in in -Bay sediment basins. UNB ERP is intended
to be a once -in -21 -year project, assuming proper management of the in- channel basins in
the San Diego Creek watershed.
• Nutrients. Approved in 1999, the Nutrient TMDL limits nitrogen and phosphorus inputs to
the Bay. The Nutrient TMDL attempts to reduce the annual loading of nitrogen by 50% --
from 1,400 pounds per day today to approximately 850 to 802 pounds per day at San Diego
Creek — by 2012. Phosphorus loading must fall from what was 86,912 Ibs /year in 2002 to
62,080 Ibs /year by this year.
Fecal Coliform. Approved in 1999, the Fecal Coliform TMDL attempts to. reduce the
amount of fecal coliform inputs to the Bay enough to make the Bay meet water contact
recreation (REC1) standards (swimming, wading, surfing) by 2014 and shellfish harvesting
(SHEL) standards (where waters support shellfish acceptable for human consumption) by
2020. Generally, most of the Bay meets the REC1 standards, but we're not close to the
SHEL standards today.
Toxic Pollutants. Approved in 2003, the Toxic Pollutants TMDL is a comprehensive TMDL
that addresses both materials in the Bay (especially in sediment) and inputs to the Bay.
These pollutants include heavy metals (like chromium, copper, lead, cadmium, mercury,
selenium, zinc) and priority organics like (endosulfan, DDT, Chlordane, PCBs, Toxaphene,
diazinon, chlorpyriphos, more). Compliance with the Toxic Pollutants TMDL(s) may
ultimately lead to the reduction or elimination of certain pesticide use by residents,
businesses, and municipalities in the Newport Bay watershed. The Toxic Pollutants TMDL
also addresses existing toxic deposits in sediments in the Rhine Channel and other areas in
the Lower Bay.
A TDML goes through several steps before it is formally approved. Generally, the
process is as follows:
1. The local Regional Board staff develops the TMDL with stakeholder input. Staff prepares
supporting documents and a proposed resolution that amends the Basin Plan (a region -wide
water quality plan for the area that the Regional Board covers. For Regional Board #8, this
is the Santa Ana River Basin).
2. The Regional Board holds noticed workshops and public hearings about the proposed
TMDL and Basin Plan Amendment (BPA).
3. The Regional Board considers and adopts the resolution adopting the TMDL and its BPA.
4. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) considers and approves the TMDL
and BPA.
5. The Office of Administrative Law (CAL) and US EPA consider and approve the TMDL and
BPA.
6. With CAL approval, the TMDL and BPA become effective.
0
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 3
The Cost - Sharing Formula. Today, administration and implementation of the four
TMDLs is cost - shared by six different "watershed partners," including the City (we are a
16.53% partner). The City is bound by a TMDL Cooperative Agreement (formally
executed by all of the parties in September 2003 and which went to your Council on
June 24, 2003) -- to implement and administer the obligations of the TMDLs through at
least 2008. The parties developed the Agreement to provide a long -term funding
formula to ensure that the costs of compliance with the TMDLs are shared equitably
among the parties within the Newport Bay /San Diego Creek watershed.
The formulas are slightly different depending on the TMDL, but generally the cost
percentages are consistent with the below chart. The formula is based on land acreage
in the watershed:
Cost -Share Formula
The formula is adjusted depending on the issue — for example, recent work to develop a
Site Specific Objective (SSO) that is part of the TMDL for Selenium involved more
partners than the six of us, adding Lennar Homes, Caltrans, Tustin Legacy Partners,
and the Great Park Corporation. The City budgets about $250,000 a year to pay the
County of Orange (the County's Resource and Development Management Department
or "RDMD" is the lead party among the partners) for TMDL administration and
implementation, with the most significant portion of that going to pay for the cleaning of
the in- channel sediment catch basis across from UCI near the San Joaquin Marsh.
Other Water Quality Regulations. In addition to the Clean Water Act's TMDL program,
the CWA directs cities to control or clean runoff entering stormdrain systems (called
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems or "MS4s') so that the runoff does not hurt
water quality at the end of the pipe. Newport Beach has more than 104 miles of MS4s
that enter Newport Bay or the Pacific Ocean at more than 200 locations.
A 5 -year permit issued under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) by the Regional Board regulates the discharge of both dry- weather and
stormwater runoff into and out of our city's storm drain system. In January 2002, the
Regional Board last adopted an NPDES Permit for the City, the County, and 24 other
co- permittee cities. The NPDES Permit tells us how to limit urban runoff, enforce and
report violations, educate residents and businesses, and to comply with the Permit. A
new 5 -year permit (covering 2007 -2012) is under review by the Regional Board today.
3
County of Orange /OCFD
28.25%
The Irvine Company
23.61%
Newport Beach
16.53%
Irvine
17.48%
Tustin
7.28%
Lake Forest
6.85%
Total
100.00%
The formula is adjusted depending on the issue — for example, recent work to develop a
Site Specific Objective (SSO) that is part of the TMDL for Selenium involved more
partners than the six of us, adding Lennar Homes, Caltrans, Tustin Legacy Partners,
and the Great Park Corporation. The City budgets about $250,000 a year to pay the
County of Orange (the County's Resource and Development Management Department
or "RDMD" is the lead party among the partners) for TMDL administration and
implementation, with the most significant portion of that going to pay for the cleaning of
the in- channel sediment catch basis across from UCI near the San Joaquin Marsh.
Other Water Quality Regulations. In addition to the Clean Water Act's TMDL program,
the CWA directs cities to control or clean runoff entering stormdrain systems (called
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems or "MS4s') so that the runoff does not hurt
water quality at the end of the pipe. Newport Beach has more than 104 miles of MS4s
that enter Newport Bay or the Pacific Ocean at more than 200 locations.
A 5 -year permit issued under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) by the Regional Board regulates the discharge of both dry- weather and
stormwater runoff into and out of our city's storm drain system. In January 2002, the
Regional Board last adopted an NPDES Permit for the City, the County, and 24 other
co- permittee cities. The NPDES Permit tells us how to limit urban runoff, enforce and
report violations, educate residents and businesses, and to comply with the Permit. A
new 5 -year permit (covering 2007 -2012) is under review by the Regional Board today.
3
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 4
About Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) and the OC TMDL. As mentioned, the broad
Toxic Pollutants TMDL directs the Regional Board staff to prepare individual TMDLs for
specific toxic pollutants, including OCs.
Organochlorines are compounds that contain carbon, chlorine, and hydrogen. Their
chlorine- carbon bonds are very strong — therefore, they do not break down easily. They
are highly insoluble in water, but are attracted to fats.
According to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, because OCs resist metabolism and are
readily stored in fatty tissue of any animal ingesting them, they are highly accumulative
in invertebrates, birds, animals and fish. Bird can pick up the OCs when they eat fish
that have been exposed to the contaminant. Humans can pick up the OCs when we eat
fish contaminated with OCs.
One of the major OCs of concern is DDT (dichloro diphenyl trichoroethane). DDT came
into favor in the 1940s through 1973, because it was a long- lasting insecticide that was
extremely effective against flies and mosquitoes. US EPA banned it on January 1, 1973
due to its long residual life and its accumulation in food chains. Other OCs include
DDE, chlordane, toxaphene, aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, PCBs, and dioxin.
The OCs proposed to be regulated by the OC TMDL are DDT, chlordane, PCBs, and
toxaphene. In recent years, the Regional Board and US EPA have put forth
preliminary TMDLs for specific reaches and tributaries to Upper Newport Bay and Lower
Newport Bay:
OC TMDL
More information about the manner in which these TMDLs were developed and
proposed is in Attachment B (RB Resolution #R8- 2007 -0024 and the "Attachment' to
the resolution).
Implementation of the TMDLs. As noted, a TMDL may include both a daily limit on
inputs to a water - quality limited water body along with a plan for remediation, analysis,
and monitoring. The proposed OC TMDL includes a detailed implementation plan with
an emphasis on gathering additional data and possibly revising (or suspending) the
u
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 5
TMDL if the data show that OCs are not a significant nor growing problem for the
watershed. As the Regional Board's Attachment says (pages 8 -12):
... the observed trends suggest that as monitoring continues in the watershed and
pollutant levels decline, some or all of the OCs may warrant delisting from the ... Section
303(d) list of impaired waters.... these TMDLs would need to be revisited accordingly."
The Implementation Plan is shown on page 13 and described in greater detail from
pages 15 -24 of Attachment B. The Plan is summarized below, including what cost -
sharing partner or other entity may be most affected by the specific costs (costs which
are yet to be determined) of each task:
Chart of Implementation Tasks
Description Task
Cost Obligation
Primarily: I
1 Revising waste discharge requirements (WDRs)
Nurseries
for commercial nurseries.
Owners &operators of ag
2
Agricultural BMPs and Monitoring.
land
owners &managers of
3
Monitoring of Open Space Areas.
opens ace
Generally, larger
4
Improve BMPs for Construction Sites, increase
construction sites that
monitoring.
require a SWPPP
Source evaluation of OC into SD Creek and UNB,
All Watershed Cities,
5
Implement better BMPS.
Stakeholders
8
Further define how large -scale dredging
All Watershed Cities,
operations in UNB will be funded.
Stakeholders
Development of a Work Plan based on Adaptive
All Watershed Cities,
7
Management to achieve TMDL compliance.
Stakeholders
All Watershed Cities,
8
Revise Regional monitoring program.
Stakeholders
All Watershed Cities,
9
Conduct special studies.
Stakeholders
10
1TMDL Reopener in 5 years.
I Regional Board
As noted on the chart, the City's major role in the Implementation Tasks will be to
participate with other watershed partners in funding Tasks 5 -9.
What Coastal -Bay Said about the OC TMDL. The Coastal -Bay Water Quality Citizens
Advisory Committee discussed this item at their February 8, 2007 agenda and
unanimously recommended that the full Council authorize the Mayor to issue a letter to
the Regional Board (adding a specific paragraph noting concern about costs) in
advance of the Board's March 2, 2007 meeting. The draft letter is Attachment A.
The Committee did so primarily upon the recommendation of Dr. Jack Skinner. The
reasons that Dr. Skinner encouraged the Committee to support the proposed TMDL
included:
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 6
1. Newport Beach should continue to take a proactive role in protecting the water quality of the
Bay. That means doing what we can reasonably do to reduce the impacts of pollution,
including pollution from Organochlorine Compounds, in the Bay.
2. OCs in the Bay and the Bay's tributaries clearly need more study and review, and one good
way to do that is to develop a "phased" TMDL. The Regional Board staff has proposed just
that. Therefore, the overall approach envisioned by the Board staff for the OC TMDL,
including the below aspects of the proposed BPA, are appropriate and proper:
• The Implementation Tasks and Schedule Table (NB- OCs -13, Page 13 of the Attachment
to Resolution R8- 2007 - 0024), allow for two implementation phases, the first involving
detailed study and review of data;
• The overall "Phased Approach" of the TMDL as discussed in Section 4.b.3 (Page 8); and
• The "Reopener" provisions in Task 10 (Phase II Implementation, Page 24).
What Others Say. Some watershed stakeholders argue that the OC TMDL is not
necessary, because OCs like DDT are no longer sold (nor legal to be used) in the
watershed. They argue that the DDT (and other OCs) problem will "solve itself' as OCs
like DDT break down slowly into less harmful materials.
To the Coastal -Bay Committee, the larger question is whether we have enough data to
say that "the problem will solve itself' with any great confidence. Without more data and
the possible development of strong Best Management Practices (BMPs), we may see
extensive amounts of legacy DDT and other OCs enter the Upper Bay from the San
Diego Creek as agricultural areas and nurseries upstream change land uses.
It is much more costly to remove sediment — contaminated or not — from the Upper Bay
than it is to stop its transport at the source. Further, OC- contaminated sediment will be
dramatically more expensive to dispose of from the Upper (and Lower) Bays, because
the sediment will require disposal in inland hazardous waste disposal sites instead of
offshore at the LA -3 Disposal Site (LA -3 is for relatively clean sediments).
Upcoming Public Hearing. On March 2, 2007, at the Orange County Sanitation
District's offices, the Regional Board will consider adopting a BPA to incorporate a
proposed OC TMDL into the Santa Ana River Basin Plan.
Environmental Review: The City Council's approval of this Agenda Item does not
require environmental review. BPAs like the Regional Board proposes to adopt are
exempt from CEQA requirements associated with Environmental Impact Reports or
Negative Declarations.
Public Notice: This agenda item may be noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours
in advance of the public meeting at which the City Council considers the item).
Funding Issues. It is uncertain what the OC TMDL may cost the City. We can best
relate this TMDL to the Selenium TMDL, which had an adjusted cost-share 'form u [a that
more directly impacted our upstream partners. Because of that experience, we expect
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 7
this TMDL to be similar, in that landowners of open space and agricultural land as well
as commercial nurseries will bear a significant cost. However, we as a cost - sharing
partner will be responsible for the study and monitoring costs in Tasks 5 -9 (see previous
chart about Implementation Tasks).
Given our experience with the Selenium TMDL, we estimate that the City's obligation
associated with the OCs TMDL will range from $80K to $100K per year for the first five
years, and likely less thereafter.
Submitted by:
"L-�
Dave Miff
Assistant City Manager
Attachment: A — Proposed Letter from Mayor Rosansky to the Regional Board
B — Regional Board Resolution R8- 2007 -0024 and "Attachment' to same
7
ATTACHMENT A
February 28, 2007
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 8
Gerald J. Thibeault, Executive Officer
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region
3737 Main Street, Suite 500
Riverside, California 92501
RE: Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Upper and
Lower Newport Bay, San Diego Creek (Resolution #R8- 2007 -0024)
Dear Mr. Thibeault:
Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment before the Regional Board in time for the
Public Hearing planned for March 2, 2007 and the pending consideration of an Organochlorine
Compounds (OCs) TMDL (and its related Basin Plan Amendment or TPA") for Upper and
Lower Newport Bay and the San Diego Creek and its tributaries. The City of Newport Beach, its
residents, and our visitors remain appreciative of the Board's continued effort to improve water
quality in Newport Bay and its tributaries.
We specifically appreciate the work of Dr. Kathy Rose and Ms. Wanda Cross of your Board's
staff in the development of this proposed TMDL. Both Dr. Rose and Ms. Cross have developed
a proposed TMDL and related BPA that incorporates good science, flexibility, and an
opportunity for revisions or adjustments should the initial implementation phase (Implementation
Phase #1) warrant such changes.
The City's Coastal -Bay Water Quality Citizen's Advisory Committee reviewed and discussed the
proposed TMDL and Basin Plan Amendment at its February 8, 2007 and agreed that the overall
approach envisioned by the Board staff for the OC TMDL, including the following specific
aspects of the proposed BPA, are appropriate and proper:
The Implementation Tasks and Schedule Table (NB- OCs -13, Page 13 of the Attachment to
Resolution R8- 2007 - 0024), which allows for two implementation phases, the first involving
detailed study and review of data;
The overall "Phased Approach" of the TMDL as discussed in Section 41.3 (Page 8); and
The "Reopener" provlslons in Task 10 (Phase II Implementation, Page 24).
While we are very supportive of the Board's work and proposed Implementation Tasks, we must
note that our City (along with other stakeholders) will continue to look with caution to the costs
associated with the OC TMDL (and other TMDLs). We know that the Board must consider
economic and other cost impacts as a part of any Basin Plan effort, and respectfully urge you to
be cognizant of these concerns.
With these comments and the above provisions in the proposed Basin Plan Amendment and
Resolution #R8- 2007 -0024, the City is pleased to support the Board's adoption of the
Organochlorine Compounds (OC) TMDL and related BPA.
Organochlorine Compounds (OCs) TMDL
February 27, 2007
Page 9
Sincerely,
STEVE ROSANSKY
Mayor of Newport Beach
cc: Members of the Newport Beach City Council
Members of the Coastal /Bay Water Quality Citizens Advisory Committee
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Santa Ana Region
RESOLUTION NO. R8- 2007 -0024 V?'91
Resolution Amending the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River
Basin to Incorporate Organochlorine Compounds
Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for San Diego Creek,
Upper and Lower Newport Bay, Orange County
WHEREAS, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana
Region (hereinafter, Regional Board), finds that:
An updated Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (Basin
Plan) was adopted by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
(Regional Board) on March 11, 1994, approved by the State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) on July 21, 1994, and approved by the Office of
Administrative Law (OAL) on January 24, 1995.
2. The Basin Plan specifies the following beneficial uses for San Diego Creek,
Reach 1: water contact recreation (RECi ); non - contact water recreation (REC2);
warm freshwater habitat (WARM); and wildlife habitat (WILD).
3. The Basin Plan specifies the following intermittent beneficial uses for San Diego
Creek, Reach 2: water contact recreation (RECi); non - contact water recreation
(REC2); warm freshwater habitat (WARM); wildlife habitat (WILD); and
groundwater recharge (GWR).
4. The Basin Plan specifies the following beneficial uses for Upper Newport Bay:
water contact recreation (RECi); non - contact water recreation (REC2);
commercial and sportsfishing (COMM); preservation of biological habitats of
special significance (BIOL); spawning, reproduction, and development (SPWN);
wildlife habitat (WILD); rare, threatened, or endangered species (RARE); marine
habitat (MAR); shellfish harvesting (SHEL); and estuarine habitat (EST).
5. The Basin Plan specifies the following beneficial uses for Lower Newport Bay:
water contact recreation (RECi ); non - contact water recreation (REC2);
commercial and sportsfishing (COMM); spawning, reproduction, and
development (SPWN); wildlife habitat (WILD); rare, threatened, or endangered
species (RARE); marine habitat (MAR); shellfish harvesting (SHEL); and
navigation (NAV).
6. The Basin Plan specifies the following narrative water quality objectives
pertaining to toxic substances applicable to inland surface waters and enclosed
bays and estuaries: 1) Toxic substances shall not be discharged at levels that
IC
Resolution No. R8- 2007 -0024
Page 2 of 5
will bioaccumulate in aquatic resources to levels which are harmful to human
health; and, 2) The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water colu n,
sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses.
7. Data obtained from the State Mussel Watch Program, Toxic Substances
Monitoring Program, and other water quality monitoring programs provided
evidence that one or more of these narrative objectives for toxic pollutants are
being or may be violated. Accordingly, the Regional Board place Upper and
Lower Newport Bay and San Diego Creek on the Clean Water Act (CWA)
§303(d) list, triggering the need for development and implementation of Total
Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) or other equally effective control actions. The
purpose of the TMDLs is to assure that water quality standards are achieved.
State law requires that an implementation plan accompany the TMDLs to
describe the actions that are to be taken, together with a compliance schedule, if
appropriate, to insure that the TMDLs are met and that compliance with water
quality standards is achieved.
8. On June 14, 2002, in response to a consent decree, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) promulgated technical TMDLs for toxic pollutants in
Upper and Lower Newport Bay and San Diego Creek that included the
organochlorine compounds. Consistent with CWA §303(d), USEPA evaluated all
readily available data for San Diego Creek and Newport Bay, and used a weight
of evidence approach to independently determine which organochlorine
compounds warranted TMDLs.
9. Subsequent to the USEPA promulgation of technical TMDLs, the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted the "Water Quality Control Policy
for Developing California's Clean Water Act Section 303(d) List" (State Listing
Policy) in September 2004. The State Listing Policy specifies a methodology for
placing a water body on the CWA §303(d) list differing from that used by the
USEPA. Regional Board staff applied the State Listing Policy methodology to
relevant data, including data that became available subsequent to USEPA's
development of technical TMDLs, and updated the water quality impairment
listings for San Diego Creek and Upper and Lower Newport Bay. Accordingly,
the organochlorine compound - waterbody combinations for which the USEPA
promulgated TMDLs differ from those identified by Regional Board staff.
10. Pursuant to Clean Water Act §303(d)(3), the Regional Board has developed
TMDLs for DDT and toxaphene for San Diego Creek and tributaries; chlordane,
DDT, and PCBs for Upper Newport Bay; and, chlordane, DDT, and PCBs for
Lower Newport Bay. In addition, the Regional Board developed informational
TMDLs for chlordane and PCBs for San Diego Creek and tributaries. While
impairment due to these constituents was not found in San Diego Creek, the
informational TMDLs are appropriate because San Diego Creek is the largest
Resolution No. 178- 2007 -0024
Page 3 of 5
source of organochlorine compounds to Newport Bay. No action to implem
the informational TMDLs is required but the informational TMDLs may d
action to address downstream chlordane and PCBs impairm
10,9 - 11. The Basin Plan amendment shown in the attachment to thiso ution was
developed in accordance with Clean Water Act §303(d) and Water Code Section
13240 et seq. The amendment is proposed for incorporation into Chapter 5
"Implementation ", of the Basin Plan. The proposed Basin Plan amendment
includes background information concerning the water quality impairment being
addressed and the sources of organochlorine compounds to San Diego Creek
and Upper and Lower Newport Bay. The proposed TMDLs are supported by a
detailed report prepared by Regional Board staff and titled 'Total Maximum Daily
Loads for Organochlorine Compounds, San Diego Creek: Total DDT and
Toxaphene. Upper and Lower Newport Bay: Total DDT, Chlordane, Total
PCBs ", November 17, 2006 (hereinafter, "TMDL Report").
12. The Basin Plan amendment will assure the reasonable protection of the
beneficial uses of surface waters within the Region and is consistent with the
State antidegradation policy (SWRCB Resolution No. 68 -16).
13. The Regional Board has considered the costs associated with implementation of
this amendment, as well as the costs resulting from failure to implement
organochlorine compound control measures necessary to prevent adverse
effects on beneficial uses. The implementation plan in the Basin Plan, which
includes extended compliance schedules and employs a phased TMDL
approach to provide for refinement based on additional studies and analyses,
will ensure that implementation expenditures are reasonable and fairly
apportioned among dischargers.
14. Review of the potential environmental impacts of the adoption and
implementation of the San Diego Creek and Upper and Lower Newport Bay
organochlorine compounds TMDLs was conducted. The adoption of the TMDLs
would have no direct effect on the environment. The implementation of projects
that may be conducted to implement the organochlorine compounds TMDLs is
expected to have less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts
with application of mitigation measures on the following: air quality, biological
resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise,
aesthetics and transportation and traffic. As projects to implement the TMDLs
are developed, specific environmental impacts and mitigation measures to
address those impacts are subject to thorough and separate evaluation pursuant
to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
15. Provided that appropriate mitigation is implemented, projects designed and
conducted to achieve the TMDLs are expected to have less than significant
impact, either individually or cumulatively, on fish and/or wildlife species.
E
Resolution No. R8- 2007 -0024
Page 4 of 5
16. The adoption of these TMDLs is necessary to reduce loadings of organochlo
compounds to San Diego Creek, and Upper and Lower Newport Bay,
address water quality impairments that arise therefrom.
17. The proposed amendment meets the "Necessity" standard oQ dministrative
Procedure Act, Government Code, Section 11352, subdivision (b).
18. The Regional Board submitted the relevant technical documents that serve as
the basis for the proposed amendment to an external scientific review panel and
has considered the comments and recommendations of that panel in drafting the
amendment.
19. The proposed amendment will result in revisions to the Basin Plan Chapter 5
"Implementation ".
20. The Regional Board discussed this matter at a workshop conducted on
December 1, 2006 after notice was given to all interested persons in accordance
with Section 13244 of the California Water Code. Based on the discussion at
those workshops, the Board directed staff to prepare the appropriate Basin Plan
amendment and related documentation to incorporate the San Diego Creek and
Upper and Lower Newport Bay organochlorine compounds TMDLs.
21. The Regional Board prepared and distributed written reports (staff reports)
regarding adoption of the Basin Plan amendment in accordance with applicable
state and federal environmental regulations (California Code of Regulations,
Section 3775, Title 23, and 40 CFR Parts 25 and 131).
22. The process of basin planning has been certified by the Secretary for Resources
as exempt from the requirement of the California Environmental Quality Act
(Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) or Negative Declaration (ND). The Basin Plan Amendment
package includes the Basin Plan amendment, staff reports, an Environmental
Checklist, an assessment of the potential environmental impacts of the Basin
Plan amendment, and a discussion of alternatives. These documents serve as
substitute environmental documents.
23. On March 2, 2007, the Regional Board held a Public Hearing to consider the
Basin Plan amendment. Notice of the Public Hearing was given to all interested
persons and published in accordance with Water Code Section 13244.
24. The Basin Plan amendment must be submitted for review and approval by the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Office of Administrative Law
(OAL) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Once approved by
the SWRCB, the amendment is submitted to OAL and USEPA. The Basin Plan
amendment will become effective upon approval by OAL. A Notice of Decision
will be filed.
13
Resolution No. 178- 2007 -0024
Page 5 of 5
25. The Notice of Filing, Notice of Public Hearing, the TMDL Report, envir to
checklist, and the draft amendment were prepared and distri i ted
individuals and public agencies for review and comment, in cc a wdh
state and federal regulations (23 CCR §3775, 40 CFR 25 an FR 131).
26. For the purposes of specifying compliance schedules in NPDES permits for
effluent limitations necessary to implement these TMDLs, the schedules
specified in these TMDLs shall govern, notwithstanding other compliance
schedule authorization language in the Basin Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
The Regional Board adopts the amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for
the Santa Ana River Basin (Region 8), as set forth in the attachment.
2. The Executive Officer is directed to forward copies of the Basin Plan amendment
to the SWRCB in accordance with the requirements of Section §13245 of the
California Water Code.
3. The Regional Board requests that the SWRCB approve the Basin Plan
amendment, in accordance with Sections §13245 and §13246 of the California
Water Code, and forward it to the OAL and U.S. EPA for approval.
4. If, during its approval process, Regional Board staff, SWRCB or OAL determines
that minor, nonsubstantive corrections to the language of the amendment are
needed for clarity or consistency, the Executive Officer may make such changes,
and shall inform the Board of any such changes.
5. The Executive Officer is authorized to sign a Certificate of Fee Exemption in lieu
of payment of the California Department of Fish and Game filing fee.
I, Gerard J. Thibeault, Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full,
true, and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board, Santa Ana Region, on March 2, 2007.
Gerard J. Thibeault
Executive Officer
fq
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007 -00XX24
ATTACHMENT TO RESOLUTION NO. R8 -2007- OOXX24
(NOTE: The language identified below is proposed to be inserted into Chapter 5 of
the Basin Plan. If the amendment is approved, corresponding changes will be made
to the Table of Contents, the List of Tables, page numbers, and page headers in the
plan. Due to the two- column page layout of the Basin Plan, the location of tables in
relation to text may change during final formatting of the amendment. In order to
accommodate other new TMDLs adopted as Basin Plan amendments and to
maintain their order by watershed, the table and figure identifiers may be modified in
future formatting of the Basin Plan for re- publication purposes. However, no
substantive changes to the tables/figures would occur absent a Basin Plan
Amendment.)
Chapter 5 - Implementation Plan, Discussio o e port Bay Watershed (page 5-
39 et seg), add the following to 4. Toxics S�sta Contamination
v fv 3.
4.b Organochlorine Compounds TMDLs
A TMDL technical report
organochlorine- related pn
the technical basis for the
F,anisms, en and chlordane,
one their persistence,
teristics vary among the
ist degradation, partition
including invertebrates,
m of these compounds can adversely
aquatic organisms and their predators,
iegional Board staff [Ref. # 1] describes
wport Bay and its watershed and delineates
follow.
The waterbody - pollutant combinations for which organochlorine compounds TMDLs
were established by the Regional Board are listed in Table NB- OCs -1. These
TMDLs differ from those established by USEPA in 2002 in several respects:
First, based on an updated impairment assessment that utilized new data and
applied the State Water Board's "Water Quality Control Policy for Developing
California's Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list" (2004) [Ref. # 2], the Regional
Board established TMDLs for a list of organochlorine compound - waterbody
combinations different from that of USEPA. As shown in Table NB- OCs -2, USEPA
also established TMDLs for dieldrin, chlordane, and PCBs in San Diego Creek and
for dieldrin in Lower Newport Bay. In contrast, the Regional Board found no
impairment as the result of dieldrin in any of these waters, nor was impairment due
to chlordane or PCBs found in San Diego Creek and its tributaries.
15
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOxx24
As described in the TMDL technical report, Regional Board staff also found no
impairment due to DDT in San Diego Creek or its tributaries. However, in adopting
the 2006 Section 303(d) list (October 25, 2006, Resolution No. 2006 - 0079), the
State Water Board found impairment due to DDT in Peter's Canyon Channel. In
response, the Regional Board established a TMDL for DDT in San Diego Creek and
its tributaries, including Peters Canyon Channel.
Second, corrections and modifications were made to loading capacities and existing
loads identified in USEPA's TMDLs. Finally, an implementation plan is specified
(see Section 4.b.3).
While the Regional Board did not establish TMDLs for chlordane and PCBs for San
Diego Creek and tributaries, the Board did develop informational TMDLs for these
substances in these waters, pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 303(d)(3). These
informational TMDLs are shown in Table NB- OCs -3. This action was taken in light of
several factors. First, the largest source of organo lorine compounds to Newport
Bay is San Diego Creek. Second, the data su the existing loading of
chlordane to the creek is greater than the loa . This suggests that the
lack of finding of impairment due to chlordane a sl a reflection of a lack of
data with which to assess impairment. Finally, 'nfor I TMDLs may
forward action to address organochlorine un lems in the watershed.
These informational TMDLs have no reg o ct ay be used as the basis
for further investigation of the relative o ib he various sources of
organochlorine compound inputs t ie Cre nd thence the Bay. In the
long -term, this would be a cte elp as per apportionment of
responsibility for it f t MID L ntified in Table NB- OCs -1.
Table MB- OCs -f. Waif
Compound TMDLs are
combinations for which Organochlorine
_Iw Waterbody
Pollutant
San Diego Creek and tributaries
DDT, Toxaphene
Upper Newport Bay
Chlordane, DDT, PCBs
Lower Newport Bay
Chlordane, DDT, PCBs
I�
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007 -00M24
Table NB- OCs -2. Waterbody- pollutant combinations for which Organochlorine
Compounds TMDLs were established by USEPA (2002) and Regional Board (2007)
Waterbody
TMDLs
USEPA
Regional Board
San Diego Creek and tributaries'
Chlordane, dieldrin,
DDT, Toxaphene
DDT, PCBs,
Toxaphene
Upper Newport Bay
Chlordane, DDT,
Chlordane, DDT,
PCBs
PCBs
Lower Newport Bay
Chlordane, dieldrin,
Chlordane, DDT,
DDT,PCBs
PCBs
"TMDLs are established for San Diego Creek and tributaries, even if impairment was only found in particular
reaches (e.g, SWRCB found DDT impairment in Peter's Canyon C nnel, a primary tributary to San Diego
Creek Reach 1, but the TMDL includes all of San Diego Creek—Ad s).
Table NB- OCs-3. Informational TMDLs
Waterbody
San Diego Creek and tributaries
4.b.1 Numeric Taftp used in Oftanolffilorine Compounds TMDLs
Numeric targets identify cific a ints in sediment, water column or tissue that
equate to attainment of wa ug . standards, which is the purpose of TMDLs.
Multiple targets may be appr a where a single indicator is insufficient to protect
all beneficial uses and /or attain all applicable water quality objectives. The range of
beneficial uses identified in this Basin Plan (see Chapter 3) for the waters addressed
by the organochlorine compounds TMDLs makes clear that the targets must address
the protection of aquatic organisms, wildlife (including federally listed threatened and
endangered species) and human consumers of recreationally and commercially
caught fish.
Sediment, water column and fish tissue targets are identified for these TMDLS, as
shown in Table NB- OCs -4. The sediment and water column targets are identical to
those selected by USEPA in the development of their organochlorine compounds
TMDLs; (2002). Fish tissue targets are added for the protection of aquatic life and
wildlife.
The targets employed in the development of informational TMDLs; for chlordane and
PCBs in San Diego Creek and its tributaries are shown in Table NB- OCs -S.
(7
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007 - 00X924
Table NB- OCs-4. Numeric Sediment. Fish Tissue. and Water Column TMDL Taraets
San Diego Creek and
Upper & Lower NewportfijR-
Acute Criterion C ,
Chronic Criterion LCM
Human Health Criterio
'Freshwater and marine sediment t
Screening Quick Reference Tables, N
Restoration Division, National Oceanic
Dept. of Environmental Conservation.
-r' Mil. 1 111 -
toxaphene, are TELs from Buchman, M.F. 1999, NOAA
AT Report 99 -1, Seattle WA, Coastal Protection and
pheric Administration, 12 pp. Toxaphene target is from MY
2Freshwater and marine fish tissue targets for protection of human health are OEHHA SVs
'Freshwater and marine fish tissue targets for protection of aquatic life and wildlife are from Water Quality
Criteria 1972. A report of the Committee on Water Quality Criteria, Environmental Studies Board, National
Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering. Washington, D.C., 1972.
°Freshwater and marine targets are from California Toxics Rule (2000).
4
Total DDT
Chlordane
I Total PCBs
Toza hene
Sediment Targets'; units are
lkg dry weight
San Diego Creek and
tributaries
6.98
0.1
Upper & Lower Newport Bay
3.89
2.26
21.5
Fish Tissue Targets for Protection
of Human Health - units are
Lg/kg wet weight
San Diego Creek and
tributaries
100
30
Upper & Lower Newport Bay
100
30
20
Fish Tissue Targets for Protection of Aquatic U
a and Wildlife - unitsareltglk
wet wei ht
San Diego Creek and
tributaries
1000
100
Upper & Lower Newport Bay
50
500
Water Column Targets for Protection of Aquatic Life. ' e & ealth (uglL)
San Diego Creek and
Upper & Lower NewportfijR-
Acute Criterion C ,
Chronic Criterion LCM
Human Health Criterio
'Freshwater and marine sediment t
Screening Quick Reference Tables, N
Restoration Division, National Oceanic
Dept. of Environmental Conservation.
-r' Mil. 1 111 -
toxaphene, are TELs from Buchman, M.F. 1999, NOAA
AT Report 99 -1, Seattle WA, Coastal Protection and
pheric Administration, 12 pp. Toxaphene target is from MY
2Freshwater and marine fish tissue targets for protection of human health are OEHHA SVs
'Freshwater and marine fish tissue targets for protection of aquatic life and wildlife are from Water Quality
Criteria 1972. A report of the Committee on Water Quality Criteria, Environmental Studies Board, National
Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering. Washington, D.C., 1972.
°Freshwater and marine targets are from California Toxics Rule (2000).
4
Attachment to Resolution No. 88- 2007 -00XX24
Table N8- OCs -5. Numeric Sediment, Fish Tissue, and Water Column Targets used in
Informational TMDLs
Chlordane Total PCBs
Sediment Targets; units are Itgikg dry weight
San Diego Creek and tributaries
4.5
34.1
Fish Tissue Targets for Protection of Human Health; units are µg /kg_wet weight
San Diego Creek and tributaries
30
20
Fish Tissue Targets for Protection of vatic Lite and Wildlife ; units are jag/kg wet weight
San Diego Creek and tributaries 100
1 500
Water Column Targets for Protection of AA juatic Life, Wildlife & Human Health /L
San Diego Creek and tributaries
Acute Criterion (CMC)
Chronic Criterion (CCC)
4 0.014
Human Health Criterion
0.0ft, 0.00017
'Freshwater sediment targets are TELs from Buchi
NOAH HAZMAT Report 99 -1, Seattle WA, Coastal
Atmospheric Administration, 12 pp.
2Freshwater fish tissue targets for protection of
3Freshwater fish tissue targets
report of the Committee on W
National Academy of Engirt
°Freshwater targets are froMAklifornia Toxics
Quick Reference Tables,
, National Oceanic and
iea re O SVs.
life a are from Water Quality Criteria 1972. A
ronmen a Studies Board, National Academy of Sciences,
11
Attachment to Resolution No. R8.2007- OOXx24
The linkage between adverse effects in sensitive wildlife species and concentrations
of the organochlorine pollutants in sediments, prey organisms and water is not well
understood at the present time, although work is underway to better understand
ecological risk in Newport Bay. In addition, the State is in the process of developing
sediment quality objectives that should provide guidance for assessing adverse
effects due to pollutant bioaccumulation. Reducing contaminant loads in the
sediment will result in progress toward reducing risk to aquatic life and wildlife.
During implementation of these TMDLs, additional and /or modified wildlife or other
targets will be identified as risk assessment information becomes available. These
TMDLs will be revisited (see 4.b.3) and revised as appropriate.
4.b.2. Organochlorine Compounds TMDLs, Wasteload Allocations, Load
Allocations and Compliance Dates
The organochlorine compounds TMDLs for San
Upper Newport Bay and Lower Newport Bay an
NB- OCs -7. The TMDLs are expressed on a
Table NB- OCs -6, and on an annual basis (gr
Expression of the TMDLs on a daily basis is into
decision. However, because of the strong seas
organochlorine compounds during storm
to occur based on average annual loadi
as possible but no later than Decem§gr 24
Table NB- OCs -6. TMDLs n
(expressed on a "daily" c
decision in Friends a Earth, v.
Diego Creek and its tributaries,
town in Tables NB -OCs -6 and
average grams per day) in
in Table NB- OCs -7.
d to I_ with a relevant court
ass d with the loading of
is opriate for implementation
-MD re to be achieved as soon
and Lower Newport Bay
nt _ the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
et at., No. 05 -5015 [D.C. Cir.2006]).
Water Body
Pol nt
TMDL
avers a grams per da a
San Diego Creek
and Tributaries
tal DDT
1.08
Toxa hene
0.02
Upper Newport Bay
Total DDT
0.44
Chlordane
0.25
Total PCBs
0.25
Lower Newport Bay
Total DDT
0.16
Chlordane
0.09
Total PCBs
0.66
aCompliance to be achieved as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2015.
PLC
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24
Table NB- OCs -7. TMDLs for San Diego Creek, Upper and Lower Newport Bay
(expressed on annual basis for implementation purposes)
Water Body
Pollutant
TMDL
rams per ear'
San Diego Creek
and Tributaries
Total DDT
396
Toxa hene
6
Upper Newport Bay
Total DDT
160
Chlordane
93
Total PCBs
92
Lower Newport Bay
Total DDT
59
Chlordane
34
Total PCBs
241
''Compliance to be achieved as soon as possible but
Informational TMDLs for San Diego Creek at
PCBs are shown in Table NB- OCs -8. Again
expressed on an average daily and annual b
Table NB- OCs -8. Informational TMDLs
(expressed on average daily and annoy
Water Body
San Diego Creek
later than December 31, 2015.
es for chlordane and total
ational TMDLs are
Tributaries
TMDL
0,34- 0.3
TMDL
San Diego Creek and Chlordane 255
Tributaries Total PCBs 4-4-4125
al
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOxX24
Wasteload and load allocations to achieve the TMDLs specified in Tables NB -OCs -6
and NB -OCs -7 are shown in Tables NB -OCs -9 and NB- OCs -10, respectively. Like
the TMDLs, the allocations are expressed in terms of both average daily and annual
loads. An explicit margin of safety (MOS) of ten percent was applied in calculating
the allocations. Consistent with the TMDL compliance schedule, these allocations
are to be achieved as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2015.
Wasteload and load allocations necessary to meet the informational TMDLs shown
in Table NB -OCs -8 are identified in Tables NB- OCs -11 (expressed as average daily
loads) and NB -OCs12 (expressed as annual loads). These allocations are identified
only for informational purposes.
4.b.3. Implementation of Organochlorine Compounds TMDLs
The implementation plan identified in this sect' r the phased approach to
the organochlorine compound TMDLs adopte ional Board. The Board
found a phased approach, with compliance sc s, opriate in light of the
following considerations. First, it was recogniz ad onitoring and
special studies were either already underw_ wo a nee ed to address data
limitations and significant uncertainty as at a th t MDL calculations, and
that changes to the TMDLs might be a pri d o the results of those
investigations. Second, it was also _e e t th se data limitations and
uncertainties pertained to the imp ent as'-- itself and the determination of
the specific organochlo ou for w MDLs are required. Third, the
natural attenuation o co n er time is expected to affect significantly
the selection, deve ent and i e ' ion of TMDLs. As described in the
TMDL technical repo ef.1], use he organochlorine compounds addressed by
these TMDLs has been ned for ny years and trend analyses indicate
declining concentrations 0 s stances in fish tissue over time. Natural
attenuation should eventuall ce organochlorine pollutant levels to
concentrations that pose no threat to beneficial uses in San Diego Creek or Newport
Bay. While natural degradation of these compounds is likely the principal cause of
the observed decline in fish tissue concentrations, the implementation of erosion and
sediment controls and other Best Management Practices to address compliance with
the sediment and nutrient TMDLs for Newport Bay and its watershed (see
discussions of these TMDLs elsewhere in this Basin Plan) is a probable factor. In
any case, the observed trends suggest that as monitoring continues in the
P"
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOX.X24
Table NB- OCs -9. TMDLs and Allocations for San Diego Creek, Upper and Lower
Newport Bay (expressed on a "daily" basis to be consistent with the recent D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. EPA, at al., No. 05-
50751D.C. Cir.2006D.ab
a Percentages for WLA (79 %) and LA (21 %) are applied to the TMDL, after subtracting the 10% MOS from the Total TMDL. Percent
WLA and Percent LA add to 100 %.
t Compliance to be achieved as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2015.
;� 3
Type
Total DDT I
Chlordane
I Total PCBs
I To hens
(average grams/day)
San Diego Creek
WLA
Urban Runoff - County MS4(36 %)
0.35
01005
Construction (28 %)
0.27
0.004
Commercial Nurseries (4 %)
0.04
0.001
Caltrans MS4 (11 %)
0.11
0.002
Subtotal - WLA(79%)
0.77
0.01
LA
Agriculture (5 %)
excludes nurseries under W DRs
0.05
0.001
Open Space (9 %)
0.09
0.001
Streams &Channels (2%)
0.02
0.0003
Undefined (5 9/6)
0.05
0.001
Subtotal - LA(21 %)
0,1
0.003
MOs
(10% of total TMDL
- 1
0.002
Total TMDL
MAW
NMk
0.02
Upper rfewport Bay
WLp
Urban Runoff - County MS4 (36 %)
V&14
0.08
0.08
Construction (28 %)
.06
0.06
Commercial Nurseries (4 %)
.01
0.01
Cattrans MS4 (110/6)
.04
0.03
0.02
Subtotal- WLA(79 %) JON
0.31
0.18
0.18
LA
Agricultu
exclu er W D
0.02
0.01
0.01
OpgAIWce 9%
0.04
0.02
0.02
s & Channels ROOM
0.005
0.005
Un 5%
0.02
0.01
0.01
Subto (21 %)
0.08
0.05
0.05
MOS
(10% of Total TMDIL
0.04
0.03
0.03
Total TMDL
0.44
0.25
0.28
Lower Newpoil Bay
WLA
Urban Runoff - County MS4 (36 %)
0.05
0.03
0.21
Construction (M)
0.04
0.02
0.17
Commercial Nurseries (4 %)
0.01
0.003
0.02
Caltrans MS4(11 %)
0.02
0.01
0.07
Subtotal - WLA(79%)
0.17
0.07
0.47
LA
Agriculture (5 9%)
excludes nurseries under W DRs)
0.01
0.004
0.03
Open Space (9 %)
0.01
0.01
0.05
Streams & Channels (2 %)
0.003
0.002
0.01
Undefined (5 %)
0.01
0.004
0.03
Subtotal- LA(21 %)
0.03
0.02
0.12
MOs
(10% of Total TMDL
0.02
0.01
0.07
Total TMDL
0.16
0.09
1 0.66
a Percentages for WLA (79 %) and LA (21 %) are applied to the TMDL, after subtracting the 10% MOS from the Total TMDL. Percent
WLA and Percent LA add to 100 %.
t Compliance to be achieved as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2015.
;� 3
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24
10
Table NB- OCs -10. TMDLs and Allocations (Annual) for San Diego Creek, Upper and
Lower Newport Bay (expressed on an "annual" basis for implementation purpose s ab
Percentages for WLA (791Y.) and LA (21 %) are applied to the TMDL, after subtracting the 10'Y° MOS from the total TMDL.
Percent WLA and Percent LA add to 100%.
° Compliance to be achieved as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2015.
ay
Total DDT
Chlordane
Total PCBs
Toxaphene
Type
(grams p
er year)
San Die o Creek
WLA
Urban Runoff - County MS4 (36 %)
Construction (28 %)
Commercial Nurseries (4 1%)
Caltrans MS4 (11 %)
Subtotal - WLA 9 %)
128.3
99.8
14.3
39.2
281.6
1.9
1.5
0.2
0.6
4.3
LA
Agriculture (5 0/6)
excludes nurseries under WDRs
17.8
0.3
Open Space 9%
32.1
0.5
Streams & Channels 2 %
7.1
0.1
Undefined 5 0k)
17.8
0.3
Subtotal- LA (21% )
74.8
1.1
MOs
10% of Total TMDL
40
0.6
Total TMDL
396 h,
6
Upper Newpon Say
WLA
Urban Runoff - County MS4 (36 %)
Construction (28 %)
Commercial Nurseries (4 %)
Caltrans MS4 (11 %)
Subtotal 9 °h)
4'��
5..
1
3.8
30.1
.4
9.
66.1
29.8
23.2
3.3
9.1
65.4
LA
Agriculture (54'6)
excludes nurseries under WDRs
7
Open Space 9%
7.6
7.5
Streams & Channels (2%)
1.7
1.7
Undefined 5%
.2
4.2
4.2
Subtotal - L �=
e
21.4
20.3
MOs
10% of Total TMDL
16
9
9
Total TMDL
_ 160
93
92
Lower Afewoort Bev
WLA
Urban Runo :'- S(79 , MS4 ( "..)
Construction (
Commercial Nur4°
Caltrans MS4 (1
Subtotal - WLA
19.1
14.9
2.1
5.8
41.9
11.0
8.6
1.2
3.4
24.2
78.1
60.7
8.7
23.9
171.4
LA
Agriculture (5 0/6)
excludes nurseries under WDRs
2.7
1.5
10.8
Ope n Space 9%
4.8
2.8
19.5
Streams & Channels 2%
1.1
0.6
4.3
Undefined 5%
2.7
1.5
10.8
Subtotal - LA 21 %)
11.2
6.4
45.5
MOS
10% of Total TMDL
5.9
3.4
24
TotalTMDL
59
34
241
Percentages for WLA (791Y.) and LA (21 %) are applied to the TMDL, after subtracting the 10'Y° MOS from the total TMDL.
Percent WLA and Percent LA add to 100%.
° Compliance to be achieved as soon as possible but no later than December 31, 2015.
ay
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24
Table NB- OCs -11. Informational TMDLs and Allocations for San Diego Creek
(ex ressed on a "daily" bests a
Category
Type
Chlordane
Total PCBs
(average grams per day)
San Diego Creek
WLA
Urban Runoff — County MS4 (36 %)
0.23
0.11
Construction (28 0%)
0.23 Q.L8
040 M
Commercial Nurseries (4%)
0480.03
048 0.01
CaOrens MS4 (11 %)
9A3QA7
4A40.03
Subtotal — WLA (79 %)
94711.50
942
LA
Agriculture (5-Q
excludes nurseries under WDRs
9,50 X03
0A20.02
Open Space (9 %)
BA3 0.06
044 0.03
Streams &Channels (2%)
4960.01
0A30.01
Undefined (5%)
PM.
B,B42L2
Subtotal — LA (219/)
0.04-0.06
MOS
10% of total TMDL
_
7
o-.060.03
Total TMDL
A&07 0.7RA
4030.34
a Percentages for WLA (7
Percent WLA and Percen
1 ' , OS from the Total TMDL..
a5
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24 12
Table NB- OCs -12. Informational TMDLs and Allocations (Annual) for San Diego Creek
(ex ressed on an "annual" basis f.
Category
Type
Chlordane
Total PCBs
rams er ear
San Diego Creek
WLA
Urban Runoff — County MS4 (369/6)
82.6
3" 40.5
Construction (2W.)
64.3
25.731.5
Commercial Nurseries (4 %)
9.2
444.5
Caltrans MS4 (11 %)
25.2
4441
Subtotal — WLA(79 %)
181.3
81.3 M.
LA
Agriculture (5%)
excludes nurseries under WDRs
11.5
5.45_6
Open Space (9 %)
20.7
1).2 10.1
Streams &Channels (2 %)
4.6
242.3
Undefined (5%)
11.5
5.35.6
Subtotal — LA (21 %)
48.2
214 23.6
MOs
10% of total TMDL
26
3413
Total TMDL
444125
Table NB- OCs -13 Vattenu d dules needed to implement the
organochlorine TM p en Plan is aimed at identifying actions to
accelerate the decichl a compound concentrations in the watershed,
and to augment thenu n. The implementation plan is focused to a
large extent on the n ere necessary, enhanced implementation of
Best Management ) to reduce the erosion and transport to surface
waters of fine sedithe organochlorine compounds tend to adhere.
Many of these BMPs are already in place as the result of existing permits issued by
the Regional Board or State Water Resources Control Board for stormwater and
construction activities, and /or in response to established TMDLs. The intent is to
assure that source control activities are implemented to reduce any active sources of
the organochlorine compounds, and in other areas where such actions will be most
effective in meeting the TMDL goals. Monitoring and special study requirements are
included to provide for TMDL compliance assessment and refinement. Each of the
tasks is described below.
Im
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- 00XX24
Table NB-OCs-13. Organochlorine Compounds TMDLs Implementation Tasks and
Schedule
13
Compliance Date — As Soon As But
Task Description No Later Than
PHASE I
IMPLEMENTATION
Revise existing WDRs and NPDES permits:
1
Commercial Nursery WDRs, MS4 Permit, Other
Upon State approval of BPA and
NPDES Permits
permit renewal
a. Develop proposed agricultural BMP and
a. (3 months after State approval of
2
monitoring program to assess and control OCs
BPA)
discharges.
b. Implement program
b. Upon Regional Board approval
3
a. Identify responsible parties for open space
a.(1 month after State approval of
areas
BPA)
b. Develop proposed monitoring program to
b. 2 months after notification of
assess OCs inputs from open space areas
r ponsible parties
c. implement proposed monitoring rogra
on Regional Board approval
Implement effective sediment and erosion o
4
BMPs for management of fine particulates on `
construction sites:
Regional Board: �-
a. Develop SW PPP Improvema Vo
n State approval of BPA)
b. Conduct outreachftraining pr am
b. months of State approval of
MS4 permittees: =
PA)
c. Revise planning pro s as ne sar
c and d: Upon appropriate revision of
to assure om ation
the MS4 permit
SW PPP
d. Eval impleme Ps tive in
r /eliminating noch e
disch
Evaluate sources o and implement
Upon appropriate revision of the MS4
5
BMPs accordingly
Nr
permit
Evaluate feasibility and mechanisms to fund future
Submit feasibility /funding report within
8
dredging operations within San Diego Creek,
(3 years after BPA approval)
Upper and Lower Newport Bay
Develop workplan to meet TMDL implementation
Workplan due (3 months after BPA
7
requirements, consistent with an adaptive
approval)
management approach
(3 months after BPA approval);
8
Revise regional monitoring program
Annual Reports due November 15
As funding allows, and in order of
9
Conduct special studies
priority identified in Task 7, if
applicable
PHASE II IMPLEMENTATION
Review TMDLs, including numeric targets, WI-As
10
and LAs; delist or revise TMDLs pursuant to
No later than (5 years from State
established Sediment Quality Objectives, new
approval of BPA)
data, and results of special studies
�-7
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- 00XX24
Table NB- OCs -14. Existing NPDES Permits and WORs Regulating Discharges in the
Newport Bay Watershed
14
No.
Permit Title
Order No.
NPDES No.
Waste Discharge Requirements for the United
1
States Department of the Navy, Former Marine
Corps Air Station Tustin, Discharge to Peters
R8- 2006 -0017
CA8000404
Canyon Wash in the San Diego Creek/Newport
Bay Watershed
Waste Discharge Requirements for the County of
2
Orange, Orange County Flood Control District
and the Incorporated Cities of Orange County
R8- 2002 -0010
CAS618030
within the Santa Ana Region - Areawide Urban
Storm Water Runoff - Orange County (MS4
permit)
R -0061 as
3
General Waste Discharge Requirements for
de 8 -2005-
CAG998001
Discharges to Surface Waters that Pose an
004
Insignificant (de minimus) Threat to Water Quality
006 -
General Waste Discharge Requirements for
4
Short-term Groundwater - Related Discharge
and De Minimus Wastewater Discharges
N-20 0 -0021
CAG998002
Surface Waters Within the San Diego
Creek/Newport Bay Watershed
General Groundwat<dpn Cl it
law
5
Discharges to Surf ao cte
R8- 2002 -0007, as
Treated Groundwat fro Cie
amended by R8 -2003-
CAG918001
of Groundwater PoI roleum
0085 and R8- 2005 -0110
Hydrocarbons, Solv Petrole
H drocarbons mixeand / or ents
6
Waste Discharge Require men of
Tustin's 17th Street Desalter
R8- 2002 -0005
CA8000305
7
Waste Discharge Requirements for City of Irvine,
Groundwater Dewatering Facilities, Irvine,
R8- 2005 -0079
CA8000406
Orange County,
8
Waste Discharge Requirements for Borders
Nursery, Inc.
R8- 2003 -0028
9
Waste Discharge Requirements Hines Nurseries,
Inc.
R8- 2004 -0060
10
Waste Discharge Requirements for El Modeno
Gardens, Inc., Orange County
R8- 2005 -0009
11
1 Waste Discharge Requirements for Nakase Bros.
Wholesale Nursery, Orange Count
R8- 2005 -0006
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24
Phase I Implementation
Task 1: WDRs and NPDES Permits
15
The Regional Board shall review and revise, as necessary, existing NPDES permits
and/or WDRs to incorporate the appropriate TMDL WLAs, compliance schedules,
and monitoring program requirements. These permits are identified in Table NB-
OCs-14. The appropriate TMDL WLAs, compliance schedules and monitoring
program requirements shall be included in new NPDES permits/WDRs. Provisions
will be included in all new and renewed NPDES permits and WDRs to specify that,
during Phase I implementation, permit compliance will be based upon iterative
implementation of effective BMPs to manage the discharge of fine sediments
containing organochlorine compounds, along with monitoring to measure BMP
effectiveness. Permit revisions shall be accomplished as soon as possible upon
approval of the Basin Plan amendment. Given Regional Board resource constraints
and the need to consider other program prioritie , r 't revisions are likely to be
tied to renewal schedules.
For commercial nurseries covered under ex
shall address the following identified needs:
(1) Evaluation of sites to determ
water discharge locations*
(2) Evaluation of current m
analysis for co cy
(3) In cooperati
the
of these WDRs
water and nonstorm
'ring gra wand methods of sampling and
othe ring efforts in the watershed;
rative xtension, evaluation of BMPs for
the most effective BMPs to
3e potentially- contaminated fine sediments
in both stor ter and n -storm water discharges;
(4) Monitoring to r qu nursery runoff as a potential source of
organochlorine c s and to assure that load reductions are
achieved; and
(5) Based on the results of the preceding tasks, development of a workplan to
be submitted within one month of the effective date of these TMDLs that
identifies: (a) the BMPs implemented to date and their effectiveness in
reducing fine sediment and organochlorine compound discharges; (b) the
adequacy and consistency of monitoring efforts, and proposed
improvements; (c) a plan and schedule for implementation of revised
BMPs and monitoring protocols, where appropriate. It is recognized that
most nursery operations are likely to be of very limited duration due to the
expiration of land leases. The workplan shall identify recommendations for
BMP and monitoring improvements that are effective, reasonable and
practicable, taking this consideration into account. This workplan shall be
implemented upon approval by the Regional Board Executive Officer.
aq
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOxX24
Revisions to the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit (R8 -2002-
0010, NPDES No. CAS618030) and monitoring program shall address the
monitoring and BMP- related tasks identified below, as appropriate. These include:
evaluation of discharges of organochlorine compounds from open space areas
(Task 3); oversight and implementation of construction BMPs (Task 4);
organochlorine compound source evaluations (Task 5); assessment of dredging
feasibility and identification of a funding mechanism (Task 6); and, revision of the
regional monitoring program (Task 8).
NPDES permits that regulate discharges of ground water to San Diego Creek or its
tributaries shall be reviewed and revised as necessary to require annual (at a
minimum) monitoring, using the most sensitive analytical techniques practicable, to
analyze for organochlorine compounds in the discharges. If organochlorine
compounds are found to be present, the dischargers shall be required to evaluate
whether and to what extent the discharges would cause or contribute to an
exceedance of wasteload allocations and to im a nt appropriate measures to
reduce or eliminate organochlorine compoun t charges. New NPDES
permits issued for these types of discharges ate the same
requirements. A.
E
I re n he watershed are not
sch e I ements. The SWRCB's "Policy
t Source Pollution Control
requires that all nonpoint source
vers of WDRs, Basin Plan prohibitions, or
ist tive tools. Board staff is developing
lulatory approach to address agricultural
onal Board will be asked to consider these
regulatory approach in late 2007.
In the interim, agricultural operators shall identify and implement a monitoring
program to assess OCs discharges from their facilities, and identify and implement a
BMP program designed to reduce or eliminate those discharges. The proposed
monitoring and BMP program shall be submitted as soon as possible but no later
than (3 months from State approval of this Basin Plan Amendment (BPA)). These
monitoring and BMP programs will be components of the waste discharge
requirements or conditional waiver of waste discharge requirements that Board staff
will recommend to implement the Nonpoint Source Policy. Load allocations identified
in these TMDLs will also be specified in the WDRs /waiver, with a schedule of
compliance.
It is recognized that most agricultural operations are expected to be of very limited
duration due to the expiration of land leases. The monitoring and BMP programs
proposed by the agricultural operators should include recommendations that are
30
Attachment to Resolution No. RB- 2007- OOXX24
17
effective, reasonable and practicable, taking this consideration into account. The
BMP and monitoring programs shall be implemented upon approval by the Regional
Board. The BMP and monitoring programs may be implemented individually or by a
group or groups of agricultural operators. In addition, these BMP /monitoring
programs may be coordinated with the development of a watershed -wide workplan
(see Task 7).
Nonpoint source discharges from open space are also subject to State regulation.
During Phase I of these TMDLs, sufficient data shall be collected by the responsible
parties (e.g., County, private land owners) to determine whether discharges of OCs
from designated open space, as well as discharges resulting from erosion in and
adjacent to unmodified streams, are causing or contributing to exceedances of water
quality objectives and /or impairment of benefici s f San Diego Creek and
Newport Bay. With the assistance of the stak Id egional Board staff will
identify the responsible parties as soon as po later than one month from
State approval of this BPA. Board staff will noti iden sponsible parties of
their obligation to propose an organochlorin omp d mo ing program within
two months of notification. The monitorin s e implemented upon
Regional Board approval. This program y b din d with the development of
a watershed -wide workplan (see Ta rand ) h eg Board will consider whether
WDRs or a WDR waiver is neces a ropr' e, based on the monitoring
results. These results wi nfo ure and revisions of these TMDLs.
Currently, all construction viti the watershed are regulated under the State
Water Resource Control Bo WRCB) General Permit for Discharge of Storm
Water Runoff Associated with onstruction Activity (Order No. 99 08 DWO, NPDES
No. CAS000002; the "General Construction Permit'), and/or the MS4 NPDES
permit. The requirements of these permits and an iterative, adaptive- management
BMP approach, coupled with monitoring, are the foundation for meeting the TMDL
WLAs for construction.
To assure that effective construction BMPs are identified and implemented, program
improvements are needed in the following areas: (a) Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) prepared in response to the General Construction
Permit must include supporting documentation and assumptions for selection of
sediment and erosion control BMPs, and must state why the selected BMPs will
meet the Construction WLAs for the organochlorine compounds; (b) SWPPP
provisions must be rigorously implemented on construction sites; (c) sampling and
analysis for the organochlorine pesticides and PCBs in storm and nonstorm
discharges containing sediment from construction sites is necessary to determine
31
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007 -OOM24
18
the efficacy of BMPs, as well compliance with the construction WI-As; sampling and
analysis plans must be included in SWPPPs; (d) additional BMPs, including
advanced treatment BMPs, must be evaluated to determine those most appropriate
for reducing or eliminating organochlorine compound discharges from construction
sites (e.g., BMPs effective in control of fine particulates); (e) outreach and training
are necessary to communicate these SWPPP requirements and assure their
effective implementation; and (e) enforcement of the SWPPP requirements is
necessary.
To address these program improvements, Regional Board staff shall develop a
SWPPP Improvement Program that identifies the Regional Board's expectations
with respect to the content of SWPPPs, including documentation regarding the
selection and implementation of BMPs, and a sampling and analysis plan. The
Improvement Program shall include specific guidance regarding the development
and implementation of monitoring plans, including the constituents to be monitored,
sampling frequency and analytical protocols. A c in ly, the SWPPP Improvement
Program shall be completed by (the date of S a al of this BPA). No later
than two months from completion of the Impr ram, Board staff shall
assure that the requirements of the Program ar mu to to interested parties,
including dischargers with existing authorizations r the ral Construction
Permit, and provide training as necessary g, prized dischargers shall
revise their project SWPPPs as needed "add he gram requirements within
three months of State approval of th D ompletion of needed
outreach and training concerning equir ents a SWPPP Improvement
Program, SWPPPs that ad tely a s_ he Program requirements shall
be considered inade or nt sha proceed accordingly.
The MS4 permit sha a re4,orrine dMto assure that the permittees
communicate the Reg I PPP expectations, based on the SWPPP
Improvement Program, nd Conditions of Approval. The MS4
permittees shall conduct st uate BMPs that are most appropriate for
reducing or eliminating orgcompound discharges from constr uction sites
(e.g., fine particulates), including advanced treatment BMPs. MS4 Permittees and
Co- permittees shall include these BMPs in the Orange County Stormwater Program
Construction Runoff Guidance Manual. Implementation of these MS4 permittee
requirements shall commence upon approval of an appropriately revised MS4
permit.
Based on the regional monitoring program being implemented by the MS4
permittees and /or on the results of other monitoring and investigations, the MS4
permittees shall conduct source analyses in areas tributary to the MS4
demonstrating elevated concentrations of OCs. Based on mass emissions
monitoring (described below) and source analysis, the permittees shall implement
3�
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007 -00X -x24 19
additional /enhanced BMPs as necessary to ensure that organochlorine discharges
from significant land use sources to surface waters are reduced or eliminated.
The permittees shall develop and implement a collection program for all banned OC
pesticides and PCBs. This type of program has had demonstrated success in other
geographic areas in collecting and disposing of banned pesticides. Residents and
businesses in the watershed may have stored legacy pesticides that could be
collected through such a program; if this is the case, this task would prevent future
use and improper disposal of these banned pesticides.
Implementation of these requirements shall commence upon approval of an
appropriately revised MS4 permit.
Because large -scale erosion and sedimen
events, traditional BMPs may have limited
discharge of potentially- contaminated sedi
weather. In such cases, dredging within N
be the most feasible and appropriate met
However, the feasibility and effectivenes
would require careful consideration, c
sediments with higher concentrati f O
significant consideration.
occurs during large storm
N cing /eliminating the
w ters during wet
id Diego Creek may
OCs loads in these waters.
k�acts in removing OCs
or may not expose
of such projects is also a
Entities dischargin V'hin mi d sediment in the watershed shall
analyze the feasibg t chie a water quality standards, and shall
identify funding m en ing that future dredging operations can be
performed, as nec S iego Creek, Upper and Lower Newport Bay. A
report that presentis effort shall be submitted no later than (three
years from the datoval of this BPA). This evaluation may be
coordinated with the development of a watershed -wide workplan (see Task 7).
33
Attachment to Resolution No, RB- 2007- OOxx24
20
These TMDLs are to be implemented within an adaptive management framework,
with compliance monitoring, special studies, and stakeholder interaction guiding the
process over time. Information obtained from compliance monitoring will measure
progress toward achievement of WI-As and LAs, potentially leading to changes to
TMDL allocations; ongoing investigations and recommended special studies, if
implemented, may provide information that leads to revisions of the TMDLs,
adjustments to the implementation schedule, and /or improved implementation
strategies. Thus, implementation of the TMDLs is expected to be an ongoing and
dynamic process.
Substantial efforts are now being made by many stakeholders in the watershed to
address established permit and /or TMDL requirements for BMP implementation and
monitoring and to conduct special investigation t rstand and improve water
quality conditions in the watershed. For exa ern California Coastal Water
Research Project (SCCW RP), the University r and the County of Orange
are all involved in studies aimed at improving t ers n of causes of
sediment toxicity, measuring mass emission dev 'ng s ent quality
objectives, analyzing sources, and other rof The Irvine Company, in
conjunction with other watershed stakeh ers , le ° ting a workplan to gain a
better understanding of biologic effe ga lorine compounds,
determining appropriate screenin ues, a de mining the cause of sediment
toxicity in the watershed a rk exl evelop a comprehensive
watershed plan for a sin r ity, not only as it relates to the
organochlorine co nds, but lar ' cale that encompasses all sources of
water quality impair
In light of this establishe ew ' ,many of the preceding implementation tasks
may be accomplished most ely and efficiently through the development and
implementation of a watershe ide workplan, developed by interested stakeholders
and approved by the Regional Board. The purpose of the workplan would be to (1)
review implementation requirements and integrate TMDL implementation tasks with
those already conducted in response to other programs (e.g., permits, TMDLs); (2)
prioritize implementation tasks; (3) develop a framework for implementing the tasks,
including a schedule and funding mechanism; (4) implement tasks; and (5) make
recommendations regarding needed revisions to the TMDLs. Stakeholders
interested in pursuing this approach are required to commit to their participation in
the development and implementation of the workplan by (one month of the State
approval of these TMDLs). A proposed workplan is to be submitted to the
SARWQCB within (3 months of State approval of these TMDLs). Implementation of
the workplan shall commence upon approval by the Regional Board. To the extent
that there are any conflicts between the individual tasks and schedules identified
above, and the prioritized plan and schedule identified in the workplan, the workplan
3y
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOxx24
21
would govern implementation activities with respect to the stakeholders responsible
for workplan development and implementation.
Task 8: Revise Regional Monitoring Program
The County of Orange, as Principal Permittee under the County's MS4 permit,
oversees the countywide monitoring program. Implementation of the monitoring
program is supported by funds shared proportionally by each of the Permittees.
Some monitoring requirements identified in this implementation plan are already
reflected in the current program.
By (3 months from State approval of BPA), the MS4 permittees shall: (1) document
each of the current monitoring program elements that addresses the monitoring
requirements identified in the preceding tasks; and, (2) revise the monitoring
program as necessary to assure compliance with these monitoring requirements.
Review of /revisions to the monitoring
(1) Estimation of mass emissions of chlo
(2) Determination of compliance with Ml-'
Lower Newport Bay, and of status ,:,
wasteload allocations for San Di „ 1
(3) Assessment of temporal
concentrations in water,
end toxaphene.
I al ' W Ions for Upper and
with the informational
otdane and PCBs.
anochlorine compound
(4) Semi - annual sedi , - on...,_ , g in go Creek and Newport Bay.
Measurement a ch try in these waters should be evaluated
with respec vidence o to effects, such as toxicity and benthic
community dation.
(5) Evaluation of o ochlorin oaccumulation and food web biomagnification
(6) Assessment of th ree hich natural attenuation is occurring in the
watershed.
Accurately quantifying the very small mass loads that are allowable under these
TMDLs will be very challenging; analytical strategies for quantifying loads of the
organochlorine compounds must be carefully explored.
Revisions to the monitoring program shall take into consideration the following
recommendations provided by members of the Organochlorine Compounds TMDL
Technical Advisory Committee (TAG):
(1) The analytical parameters measured need to be established for each
matrix of interest (e.g., sediment, tissue, ambient water). The
representative list of compounds to be measured needs to be identified
(e.g., what chlordane compounds will be measured and summed to
represent "total chlordane;" will PCB congeners be measured and
summed or will Aroclors ?).
35
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24
22
(2) Data quality will need to be consistent with the State's Surface Water
Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). Detection limits, accuracy and
precision of analytical methods should be adequate to assure the goals of
the monitoring efforts can be achieved.
(3) Bioaccumulation /biomagnification in high trophic level predators may not
immediately respond to load reductions; appropriate time scales and
schedules for monitoring that are supported by empirical data and /or
modeling should be established.
(4) Sentinel fish and wildlife species should be selected for monitoring based
on home range, life history, size and age.
Task 9: Conduct Special Studies
The following special studies should be conducted, in
underway in the watershed. This list is based, in part
technical advisory committee for the organochl i
studies will be implemented as resources bec e a
used to review and revise these TMDLs. Sta i
investigations are encouraged and would facilit , t
(1) Evaluation of sediment toxicity in
Upper and Lower Newport Bay.
addition to the studies already
on recommendations of the
>> pounds TMDLs. These
ble, and the results will be
ributions to these
and tributaries, and
Previous studies have included T Ide icati evaluations (TIES) that have
yielded inconclusive res o t a-" use Ity in Newport Bay. Sediment
toxicity within San Di re o - documented or well- understood. There is
evidence that pyre compou m a significant contributor. In determining
the extent to which olar organs omp unds are causing or contributing to
sediment toxicity, the ential co bution of both the organochlorine compounds
and pyrethroids should b ter to assure that control actions are properly
identified and implemented. ring should be performed year -round at multiple
locations within San Diego Cr and Newport Bay (to encompass spatial and
temporal variability), and should include various land use types in order to quantify
the relative contributions from various sources.
(2) Refinement of sediment and tissue targets.
A study is being conducted by the San Francisco Estuary Institute to develop
indicators and a framework for assessing the indirect effects of sediment
contaminants. The objective is to provide methodology that will assist in evaluating
indirect adverse biological effects for bioaccumulative pollutants (e.g. due to food
web biomagnification), as part of the overall goal of developing statewide sediment
quality objectives. Newport Bay is being used as a case study to show how the
proposed methodology could be implemented on a screening level. Multiple lines of
evidence will be evaluated to determine impacts of organochlorine pesticides and
PCBs to humans and wildlife. A conceptual foodweb model will be developed, and
36
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007 -0=24
23
sensitive wildlife receptors will be identified. Empirical field data and a steady -state
food web model will be used to calculate bioaccumulation factors for the
organochlorine compounds. The bioaccumulation factors will be combined with
effects thresholds to identify sediment concentrations that are protective of target
wildlife and humans.
Once completed by SFEI, a thorough evaluation of the Newport Bay case study
needs to be initiated, and any additional analyses required for a more in -depth risk
analysis should be identified and completed. Protective sediment and tissue targets
for indirect effects to humans and wildlife should be developed by the time the
TMDLs are re- opened. Furthermore, once TIEs have identified the likely toxicant(s)
responsible for sediment toxicity in San Diego Creek and Newport Bay (direct
effects), field and laboratory studies should be conducted in order to determine
bioavailability and the dose - response relationship between sediment concentrations
and biologic effects.
(3) Evaluation of regional BMPs (e.g., co
detention basins) for mitigating poten
sediment - associated pollutants (e.g.,
(4) Improvemenil
toxaphene in
a and sediment
quality impacts of
nds and storm water
MPs in reducing adverse
algional BMPs are either
, IRWD NTS). Their
compounds and mitigating
measured in fish tissue and
The toxaphene impairment r San Diego Creek is based on fish tissue
exceedances that have nom red linkage with toxaphene in sediments. While
sediment is the primary TMDL target for these TMDLs, toxaphene is usually not
detected in sediment. Because of its chemical complexity, there is a large degree
of analytical uncertainty with measurements of toxaphene in environmental samples
that use standard methods (e.g., EPA Method 8081 a), especially at low levels.
Confirmations of toxaphene in fish and sediment samples in San Diego Creek (and
possibly Newport Bay) using other techniques (e.g., GC- ECNI -MS or MS /MS) is
recommended.
(5) Evaluation of relative importance of continuing OCs discharges to receiving
waters through erosion and sedimentation processes, versus recirculation of
existing contaminated bed sediments, in causing beneficial use impairment in
San Diego Creek and Newport Bay.
33
Attachment to Resolution No. R8- 2007- OOXX24 24
This study should allow for determination of the most effective implementation
strategies to reduce organochlorine compounds in the MS4 and other receiving
waters.
Phase II Implementation
Task 10: TMDL Reopener
These TMDLs will be reopened no later than (five (5) years following State approval
of this BPA) in order to evaluate the effectiveness of Phase I implementation. At
that time, all new data will be evaluated and used to reassess impairment, BMP
effectiveness, and whether modifications to the TMDLs are warranted. If Phase I
BMPs have been shown to be ineffective in reducing levels of organochlorine
compounds, then more stringent BMPs may be necessary during Phase II
implementation.
Implementation of these TMDLs and the sche re _ plementation are very
closely tied with other TMDLs that are current e' _ emented in the watershed.
The sediment TMDL allowable load for an Die reek t e basis for
calculating organochlorine compound loadin cap ' S. _ diment TMDL is
scheduled for revision in 2007; changes t - " dim TMDLs will likely
necessitate changes to these organochl a c, M un MDLs as well.
s
,t<
38