| Water Body Name: | Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
| Water Body ID: | CAR4021001020020131161119 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
68180 |
Region 4 |
Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
||
| Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database and are not available in the administrative record.
Even though fecal coliform is no longer the applicable indicator bacteria for fresh waters in the Los Angeles Region, studies show (Noble et al., 2003) that 80 to 90% of fecal coliform are E coli in the Los Angeles Region, and therefore the fecal coliform data used to list this waterbody is a reasonable stand in for E coli until E coli data is available. This conservative approach will limit the potential for delisting this waterbody which data has shown to be impaired for fecal indicating bacteria. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 2001 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of 9 samples exceeded (SWRCB, 2003). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Basin Plan: In waters designated for water contact recreation (REC-1), the fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed a log mean of 200/100 ml (based on a minimum of not less than four samples for any 30-day period), nor shall more than 10 percent of total samples during any 30-day period exceed 400/100 ml. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Unknown. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Different seasons and years. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Unknown. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
69830 |
Region 4 |
Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| TMDL Name: | Ventura River Algae/Nutrients (88) |
| TMDL Project Code: | 427 |
| Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 06/28/2013 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database.
There is sufficient justification to place this waterbody/pollutant in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The Ventura River Algae TMDL was approved by USEPA on 06/28/2013. 2. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4078 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Low Dissolved Oxygen | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94154 |
Region 4 |
Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
||
| Pollutant: | Ammonia |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 12 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 12 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 83541 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 12 samples exceeded the objective for ammonia. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ojai Valley Sanitary District River Station, 2000-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Plan 30-day objective for ammonia is a function of pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages. The objective is applied presuming early life stages are present. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected approximately 300 feet west of Ventura Avenue. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from February 2000 to May 2003. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected as required by permit for Ojai Valley Sanitary District WWTP. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
98525 |
Region 4 |
Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
||
| Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 3.9 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.9, an additional line of evidence associating the Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants is necessary to assess listing status. The IBI score for this site is below 40 and scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions.
Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this water segment on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3.The IBI score for this site is below 40 and scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions. However, this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 2 samples is needed to determine impairment using Table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
| 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: | The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 83540 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One sample was collected from Canada Larga Creek (below grazing) in September 2006. The sample had an IBI score below 40. The score was 34.32 (2006). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Bioassessment Monitoring Report in Ventura River Watershed for, 2001-2007. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board. Region 4 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Development of a Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) for Wadeable Streams in Northern Coastal California and its Application to Regional 305(b) Assessment | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The sample was collected at station 2 Canada Larga Creek (below grazing). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in September 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Sampling and laboratory procedures for this survey followed the California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP 2003) and also incorporated the Southern California Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) (Ode et al., 2005). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94213 |
Region 4 |
Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 3 of 25 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 3 of 25 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 83542 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Three out of the 25 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for temperature in this water body. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ojai Valley Sanitary District River Station, 2000-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters designated as COLD, water temperature shall not be altered more than 5 degrees F above the natural temperature. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Inland Fishes of California (Moyle 1976) states that for rainbow trout the optimum range for growth and completion of most life stages is 13-21 degrees C (page 129). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Inland Fishes of California | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected approximately 300 feet west of Ventura Avenue at station R8. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from February 2000 to May 2003. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected as required by permit for Ojai Valley Sanitary District WWTP. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74136 |
Region 4 |
Canada Larga (Ventura River Watershed) |
||
| Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2021 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 21 of 51 samples exceed the Basin Plan Water Quality Objective for Selected Constituents in Inland Surface Waters (water body specific for Ventura River Reach 2) of 1500 mg/L for TDS, and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current. The decision has not changed. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 25720 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 51 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 21 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data collected for the Santa Barbara ChannelKeeper Water Quality Monitoring Program (2001 to 2007). A total of 21 out of 51 samples exceeded the water quality objective of 1500 mg/L. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Water Quality Data Submittal and 303(d) List Recommendations | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan Water Quality Objective for Selected Constituents in Inland Surface Waters--water body specific for Ventura River Reach 2--is 1500 mg/L for TDS. By the tributary rule this objective also applies to Canada Larga. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | VR04 sampling site is located downstream of the Canada Larga bridge (Lat 34.336916, Long -119.294114). VR05 sampling site is located 3.5 miles up Canada Laraga Road, at a small bridge over the creek (Lat 34.357559, Long -119.252581). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Grab samples taken and analyzed on monthly basis from August 2001 to May 2006. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data collected and analyzed according to the provisions of the Ventura River Watershed Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Project Plan (Santa Barbara Channelkeeper, October 2004). | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Ventura River Watershed Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Project Plan (Santa Barbara Channelkeeper, October 2004) | ||||