| Water Body Name: | Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
| Water Body ID: | CAR4022002119990203090836 |
| Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
78169 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Pumping |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Reason for Delisting: | Flaws in original listing |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollution |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The original Listing was flawed because pumping is not a pollutant but rather could fall under the definition of pollution. Because the original basis for the decision cannot be determined and no new information has become available this is being removed from the CWA section 303(d) List. If further information or data becomes available in the future indicating an impairment exists for pollution this will water body-pollution combination will be moved to Category 4c.
The Ventura River TMDL for Algae, Eutrophic Conditions and Nutrients in the Ventura River and its tributaries was approved by EPA on June 28, 2013. In EPA's approval letter for the TMDL, EPA stated "Based on EPA's approval of the State' s TMDLs addressing the algae, eutrophic conditions and nutrient impairments, together with other available information regarding Reaches 3 and 4 of the Ventura River, EPA has determined that it is unnecessary at this time to establish separate actions for the pumping and water diversion in Reaches 3 and 4 of the Ventura River. The State's TMDLs address the same beneficial uses as EPA's draft TMDLs, identify the same stressors as EPA, were developed with reference to the existing hydrological conditions in the watershed, including pumping and water diversion activities, and provide the same nutrient loading capacities. The State's nitrogen and phosphorus TMDLs also apply throughout the Ventura River, its estuary, and all tributaries. EPA finds that the State's nitrogen and phosphorus TMDLs provide equivalent protection of water quality in Reaches 3 and 4 of the Ventura River as EPA's proposed TMDLs. Therefore, EPA is not establishing nitrogen and phosphorus TMDLs for the pumping and water diversion impairment listings. Other State and Federal agencies have additional authorities which may be available to address other potential impacts of pumping and water diversion within Reaches 3 and 4." For background information regarding this listing decision, see ref4378 located at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/records/region_4/2017/ref4378.doc |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the impairment is due to a non-pollutant or pollution. This impairment therefore falls under Integrated Report Category 4c. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
The water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. However, more sampling should be done as the information available indicates impairment may be probable. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4263 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pumping | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollution | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold 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: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
100083 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Water Diversion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Reason for Delisting: | Flaws in original listing |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollution |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | 303(d) listing decisions made prior to 2006 were not held in an assessment database. The original Listing was flawed because water diversion is not a pollutant but rather could fall under the definition of pollution. Because the original basis for the decision cannot be determined and no new information has become available this is being removed from the CWA section 303(d) List. If further information or data becomes available in the future indicating an impairment exists for pollution this will water body-pollution combination will be moved to Category 4c.
The Ventura River TMDL for Algae, Eutrophic Conditions and Nutrients in the Ventura River and its tributaries was approved by EPA on June 28, 2013. In EPA's approval letter for the TMDL, EPA stated "Based on EPA's approval of the State' s TMDLs addressing the algae, eutrophic conditions and nutrient impairments, together with other available information regarding Reaches 3 and 4 of the Ventura River, EPA has determined that it is unnecessary at this time to establish separate actions for the pumping and water diversion in Reaches 3 and 4 of the Ventura River. The State's TMDLs address the same beneficial uses as EPA's draft TMDLs, identify the same stressors as EPA, were developed with reference to the existing hydrological conditions in the watershed, including pumping and water diversion activities, and provide the same nutrient loading capacities. The State's nitrogen and phosphorus TMDLs also apply throughout the Ventura River, its estuary, and all tributaries. EPA finds that the State's nitrogen and phosphorus TMDLs provide equivalent protection of water quality in Reaches 3 and 4 of the Ventura River as EPA's proposed TMDLs. Therefore, EPA is not establishing nitrogen and phosphorus TMDLs for the pumping and water diversion impairment listings. Other State and Federal agencies have additional authorities which may be available to address other potential impacts of pumping and water diversion within Reaches 3 and 4." For background information regarding this listing decision, see ref4378 - https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/records/region_4/2017/ref4378.doc |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the impairment is due to a non-pollutant or pollution. This impairment therefore falls under Integrated Report Category 4c. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
The water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. However, more sampling should be done as the information available indicates impairment may be probable. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 4264 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Water Diversion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollution | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold 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: | |||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96843 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | 2, 4 D methyl ester / 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid methyl ester |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90104 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 2, 4 D methyl ester / 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid methyl ester | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 70 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96844 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | 2, 4 DB / 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy) butyric acid |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90105 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 2, 4 DB / 4-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy) butyric acid | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level* criteria is 56 ug/L | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96845 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90106 | ||||
| Pollutant: | 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 50 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96899 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Aciflorfen |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90107 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aciflorfen | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the evaluation guidleine criteria. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Region 4 Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level is 91 ug/L | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96900 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Alachlor |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89568 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Alachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 2 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96901 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin |
| 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 0 sample 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 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. 0 of 0 sample 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: | 89569 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limit for non detect sample was .005 ug/L which is greater than the evaluation guideline, therefore these data are not of sufficient resolution to determine if water quality standards are being achieved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Region 4 Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxic Rule criteria is 0.00013 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96902 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 |
| 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. 2 of 2 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. 2 of 2 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: | 89570 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Alkalinity as CaCO3. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Alkalinity as CaCO3 criteria for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is 20000 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
95950 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Aluminum |
| 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.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89605 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Aluminum. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for aluminum is 0.2 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89572 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Aluminum, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface water shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The National Recommended Water Quality Critiera for the protection of aquatic life from aluminum is the chronic continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) of 87 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
95951 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89607 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 0.150 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89606 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for arsenic incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 0.010 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
95952 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Atrazine |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89608 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Atrazine | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California primary MCL for atrazine is 1.0 ug/L for drinking water. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | MCLs for Regulated Drinking Water Contaminants, California Department of Public Health. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96015 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Bentazon |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89643 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Bentazon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 18 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
100010 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| 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. Both of the samples collected scored below 0.79 on the CSCI, which means this water body would be considered to have impaired conditions based on the bioassessment.
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 does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Both of the samples collected scored below 0.79 on the CSCI, which means this water body would be considered to have impaired conditions based on the bioassessment. However, the samples were collected one day apart and lack temporal representation. 4. There is one exceeding pollutant to associate with Benthic Community Effects. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are being met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the following changes to the decision:
The water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. However, more sampling should be done as the information available indicates impairment may be probable. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89650 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | There were nine out of 38 samples that 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 30 yards above the confluence with San Antonio Creek (R-1). | ||||
| 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): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 95290 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The two samples had CSCI scores below 0.79 and therefore exceeded the water quality objective for this water body. The data was originally provided as an IBI score. The IBI score was converted to a CSCI score. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are lethal to or that produce significant alterations in population or community ecology or receiving water biota. In addition, the health and life history characteristics of aquatic organisms in waters affected by controllable water quality factors shall not differ significantly from those for the same waters in areas unaffected by controllable water quality factors. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rhen, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from Ventura River Random Site 31, and Ventura River Random Site 335. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in May 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected for the SWAMP RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY 2008 following SWAMP protocols and stored in the SWAMP database. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96244 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Bifenthrin |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89645 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Bifenthrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | UC Davis Aquatic Life Criteria: Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Bifenthrin does not exceed 0.0006 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96246 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Bromacil |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89646 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Bromacil | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Region 4 Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA, OPP Drinking Water Health Advisory - non cancer, is 70 ug/L for drinking water. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Advisory: Consumer Acceptability Advice and Health Effects Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96552 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89647 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for cadmium incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 0.005 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89648 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96307 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Captan |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89680 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Captan | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Cal/EPA Cancer Potency Factor as a drinking water level** criteria is 15 ug/L | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96553 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chloramben |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89681 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chloramben | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the two samples exceeded the the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA Health Advisory criteria is 100 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2011 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The two samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96369 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89682 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. Chlordane, alpha-chlordane, gamma-chlordane, Heptachlor, Heptachlor Epoxide, cis-and trans Nonachlor and Oxychlordane results were added to assess this waterbody. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The MUN beneficial use objective of Region 4 Basin Plan is 0.1 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96429 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89683 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA Health Advisory 2011 ed., criteria for chlorpyrifos in freshwater is 2.0 ug/L (represents a life-time risk). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Advisory: Consumer Acceptability Advice and Health Effects Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96554 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Chromium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89713 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89684 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chromium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chromium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for total chromium incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 0.05 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96610 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Copper |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89714 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Copper. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxic Rule objective for copper in water water and organisms for the protection of human health is 1300 µg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89715 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Copper, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96430 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cyanazine |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89716 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyanazine | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA Health Advisory criteria is 1 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96611 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89717 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Cyhalothrin, lambda, total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface water shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | UC Davis Aquatic Life Criteria: Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Cyhalothrin, lambda, total does not exceed 0.0005 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96612 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Cypermethrin |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89718 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cypermethrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Cypermethrin, total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The interim freshwater criterion maximum concentration is 0.002 ug/L (DFG 00-6, 2000). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Sacramento River Water Sampling Data for 303(d) Listing/Delisting Process. Letter W-101-200-000 and data files | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96745 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) |
| 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 0 sample 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 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. 0 of 0 sample 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: | 89685 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limit for all the samples is greater than the evaluation guideline and therefore data cannot be used. The 4,4' DDT criterion is applicable to Total DDT. Total DDT is the sum of 4,4- and 2,4-isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxics Rule Criteria Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection Continuous Concentration (4-day Average)criteria is 0.001 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96613 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dacthal |
| 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 0 sample 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 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. 0 of 0 sample 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: | 89752 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dacthal | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limit for ten samples was 0.01 ug/L which is greater than the evaluation guideline, therefore these data are not of sufficient resolution to determine if water quality standards are being achieved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) One-in-a-Million Incremental Cancer Risk Estimate criteria is 0.008 ug/L | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96431 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dalapon |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89753 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dalapon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 200 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96159 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Deltamethrin |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89755 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Deltamethrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Deltamethrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Deltamethrin is the maximum acceptable toxicant concentration (MATC) of 0.02 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96432 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89756 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline criteria. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Notification Level for Diazinon is 1.2 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Notification and Response Levels: An Overview | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96490 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dicamba |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89786 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dicamba | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline criteria. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The National Academy of Sciences Health Advisory criteria is 8.75 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96491 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorvos |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89787 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dichlorvos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline criteria. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level* criteria is 3.5 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Summary for the Compound Dichlorvos | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96030 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
| 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 0 sample 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 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. 0 of 0 sample 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: | 89788 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limit for the non-detect sample was 0.005 ug/L which is greater than the evaluation guideline, therefore these data are not of sufficient resolution to determine if water quality standards are being achieved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxic Rule Human Health Protection (30-day average)criteria is 0.00014 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96492 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dimethoate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89789 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dimethoate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline criteria. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Calif. DPH Notification Level is 1 ug/L for drinking water. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Notification and Response Levels: An Overview | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96493 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Dinoseb |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89790 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Dinoseb | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 7 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96551 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Diphenamid |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89823 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diphenamid | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The National Academy of Sciences Health Advisory criteria is 200 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96033 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89824 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Disulfoton | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level* criteria is 0.3 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Summary for the Compound Disulfoton | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96093 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | EPTC (Eptam, s-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89865 | ||||
| Pollutant: | EPTC (Eptam, s-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | TheUSEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level* criteria is 180 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96094 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89825 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. Results of Endosulfan I and Endosulfan II were added for assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | California Toxic Rule criteria fresh aquatic life protection continuous concentration (4-day average)is 0.056 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96095 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89826 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxic Rule criteria source of drinking water (water & fish consumption) 30-day average is 110 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96148 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Endrin |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89827 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. Endrin, Endrin Aldehyde, and Endrin Ketone were added to assess this waterbody. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The MUN beneficial use objective of Region 4 Basin Plan 2.0 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96149 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89866 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate, total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for esfenvalerate/fenvalerate is the median lethal concentration (LC50) of 1.13 ug/L, as determined in a 96 hour toxicity test using the fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas. (USEPA OPP Ecotoxicity database) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96150 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89867 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Fenpropathrin. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Fenpropathrin is the median lethal concentration (LC50; 2.2 ug/L). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96510 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Glyphosate |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89868 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Glyphosate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The MUN beneficial use objective of Region 4 Basin Plan is 700 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96511 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89869 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The MUN beneficial use objective of Region 4 Basin Plan is 0.01 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96512 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89905 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The MUN beneficial use objective of Region 4 Basin Plan is 0.01 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
74868 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 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 against 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. Six of 43 samples exceeded the Basin Plan Water Quality Objects for indicator bacteria to protect REC-1 beneficial uses, and this does not exceed 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 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 because applicable water quality standards are not 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: | 25706 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 43 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data collected for the Santa Barbara ChannelKeeper Water Quality Monitoring Program (2001 to 2007). A total of six out of 43 for E. coli samples exceeded the single sample limit (Santa Barbara ChannelKeeper, 2007). | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Water Quality Data Submittal and 303(d) List Recommendations | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Basin Plan bacteria objectives state that to protect water contact recreation in fresh waters individual samples shall not exceed the following limits: fecal coliform density shall not exceed 400/100 ml; and E. coli density shall not exceed 235/100 ml. The bacteria objectives also establish that the geometric means of individual samples shall not exceed the following limits: the fecal coliform density shall not exceed 200/100 ml; and the E. coli density shall not exceed 126/100 ml, as a geometric mean. The bacteria objectives are found in Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2001-018. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | VR11 sampling site is located below the Santa Ana Road bridge (Lat 34.399444, Long -119.308056). VR12 sampling site is located upstream of the Santa Ana Road bridge (Lat 34.424722, Long -119.302500). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Grab samples taken and analyzed on monthly basis from January 2001 to June 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) | ||||
DECISION ID |
96513 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Iron |
| 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.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89906 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Iron, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Central Valley Region, Tulare Lake Basin: waters shall not contain chemical constituents in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations are intended protect aquatic organisms from chronic exposures (expressed as 4-day average concentration) in freshwater. The evaluation guideline for iron is 1,000 ug/L to protect warm freshwater habitat. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89907 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Iron. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for Iron is 0.3 mg/L (Title 22 California Code of Regulations). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96571 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Lead |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89908 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Lead. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Public Health Goal for lead in sources of drinking water is 0.0002 mg/L. (OEHHA 2009) | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Public Health Goal for Lead in Drinking Water | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89909 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Lead. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96572 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89935 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxic Rule Human Health Protection (30-day avg; fish consumption only)is 0.063 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96573 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Malathion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89936 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA National Recommended Criteria Maximum Concentration and Criterion Continuous Concentration for freshwater to protect aquatic life is 0.1ug/L of Malathion. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96574 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Manganese |
| 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 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89937 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Manganese | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Manganese. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for manganese is 0.05 mg/L (Title 22 California Code of Regulations). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96630 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Merphos |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89938 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Merphos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | (USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level*)is 0.2 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96631 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Methoxychlor |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89939 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methoxychlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 30 ug/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96632 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89970 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Dept. of Health Services Notification Level for methyl parathion is 2 ug/L for drinking water. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Archived Advisory Levels for Drinking Water. California Department of Health Services - Drinking Water Program | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96633 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Metolachlor |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89971 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Metolachlor | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) Water & Fish Consumption criteria is 44 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96210 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Metribuzin |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89972 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Metribuzin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA Drinking Water Health Advisories - non cancer, is 70 ug/L for drinking water. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Advisory: Consumer Acceptability Advice and Health Effects Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96211 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Mirex |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89973 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Cal/EPA Cancer Potency Factor as a drinking water level for mirex is 0.0019 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96212 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Molinate |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89974 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Molinate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan."The objective is 20 ug/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96213 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Naled |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90005 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Naled | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD) as a drinking water level* is 14 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS for the Compound Naled | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96270 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nickel |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 90006 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (page 3-8) states that water designated for use as Domestic or Municipal Supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in the provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for nickel is 0.1 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90007 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nickel, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
99408 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 1 of 14 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 2 and 1 of 14 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: | 90008 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-8 of The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region specifies the Nitrate/Nitrite as N objective for the Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) within the Ventura River watershed's Between Camino Cielo Road and Casitas Vista Road reach boundary as 5 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90037 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 2 samples exceed the water Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) at 10 mg/L. The data are reported as below the quantitation limit and a non-detect. These quantitation limit and non-detect are less than or equal to the water quality standard, the value will be considered as meeting the water quality standard, objective, criterion, or evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB 1994): Waters shall not exceed 10 mg/L nitrogen as nitrate-nitrogen plus nitrite-nitrogen (NO3-N + NO2-N), 45 mg/L as nitrate (NO3), 10 mg/L as nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N), or 1 mg/L as nitrite-nitrogen (NO2-N) or as otherwise designated in Table 3-5. The water objective on Table 3-5 for Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) is 10 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at 402BA0031 (Ventura River Random Site 31) and 402BA0335 (Ventura River Random Site 335). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples collected on 5/27/2008 and 5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90009 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the twelve composite samples exceeded the objective for nitrate + nitrite. Sampling data for nitrate and nitrite were summed to determine whether sampling data met the water quality objectives. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ojai Valley Sanitary District River Station, 2000-2010. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region site specific objective for Nitrogen (Nitrate + Nitrite as N) in the Ventura River Watershed between Camino Cielo Road and Casitas Vista Road is 5 mg/L. From Table 3-8 "Water Quality Objectives for Selected Constituents in Inland Surface Waters". | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected approximately 30 yards above the confluence with San Antonio Creek (R-1). | ||||
| 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 |
99410 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 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 2 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: | 90041 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (NO3 as N) incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 45 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
99411 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 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 2 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: | 90042 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrite as N. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (page 3-8) states that water designated for use as Domestic or Municipal Supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified in the provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals), Table 64444-A of Section 64444 (Organic Chemicals). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for nitrite as N is 1.0 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
99409 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total 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 is necessary to assess listing status.
4 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 18 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List 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. 0 of 18, 0 of 2, 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 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 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 because applicable water quality standards are not 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: | 94510 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface water shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia ? Freshwater (USEPA 2013): the 30-day rolling average concentration (criterion continuous concentration or CCC) of total ammonia nitrogen(in mg TAN/L) in freshwater are not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average. The CCC values are based on pH and temperature. The CCC formula is found on page 46 and the table of CCC values is on page 49. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 94511 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface water shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA's Lifetime Health advisory level for total ammonia is 30.0 mg/L as stated on page 8 of the 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. (EPA 822-R-06-013, 2006). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | 2006 edition of the drinking water standards and health advisories. EPA 822-R-03-013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90039 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 14 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 30 yards above the confluence with San Antonio Creek (R-1). | ||||
| 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): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90038 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 4 samples exceeded the objective for ammonia. Although no temperature data was provided for the calculation of the water quality objective, pH data was available and temperature was presumed to be at 30 degrees Celsius which at which the ammonia objective is most conservative. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| 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 in the Happy Valley Drain (a tributary to the Ventura River) at site Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from October 2009 to March 2010. Each sample represented its own a 30-day period. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected by the Ventura Countywide NPDES Stormwater Monitoring Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90040 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 2 samples exceed the water USEPA Temperature and pH-Dependent values of the CCC (Chronic Criterion) for Fish Early Life Stages Present for ammonia. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region (Basin Plain): In order to protect aquatic life, ammonia concentrations in inland surface waters characteristic of freshwater shall not exceed the values calculated for the appropriated instream conditions shown in Tables 3-1 to 3-3 (per U.S. EPAs most recent criteria guidance document, 1999 Update of Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia). The freshwater 30-day average objective is dependent on pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages of fish. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at 402BA0031 (Ventura River Random Site 31) and 402BA0335 (Ventura River Random Site 335). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples collected on 5/27/2008 and 5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96271 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| 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.
3 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 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. 0 of 2, 0 of 2, and 0 of 2 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: | 90073 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 2 samples exceed the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB 1994): The dissolved oxygen content of all surface waters designated as COLD shall not be depressed below 6 mg/L as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the 402BA0031 (Ventura River Random Site 31) and 402BA0335 (Ventura River Random Site 335). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 5/27/2008 and 5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90071 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (page 3-11) states that: "The dissolved oxygen content of all surface waters designated as WARM shall not be depressed below 5 mg/L as a result of waste discharges." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90072 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (page 3-11) states that: "The dissolved oxygen content of all surface waters designated as both COLD and SPWN shall not be depressed below 7 mg/L as a result of waste discharges." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96272 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Parathion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90074 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Parathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Freshwater Aquatic Life Protection Recommended Criteria Continuous Concentration (4-day Average) criteria is 0.013 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96273 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Pentachlorophenol (PCP) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90075 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Pentachlorophenol (PCP) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 1 ug/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96332 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Permethrin |
| 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 0 sample 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 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. 0 of 0 sample 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: | 90076 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Permethrin, Total. Two samples were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | UC Davis Aquatic Life Criteria: Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Permethrin; Permethrin, total does not exceed 0.0002 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96333 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Phorate |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 90113 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Phorate | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | (National Academy of Sciences Health Advisory) criteria is 0.7 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96334 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Picloram |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89573 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Picloram | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 500 ug/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96335 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Prometon (Prometone) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89574 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Prometon (Prometone) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | (USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD)as a drinking water level* ) is 110 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96394 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Prometryn |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89575 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Prometryn | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | (USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD)as a drinking water level* ) is 28 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96395 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Selenium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89576 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for selenium incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 0.05 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR Title 22 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89577 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium, dissolved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The selenium criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.005 mg/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96397 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Silver |
| 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.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89609 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Silver. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for silver is 0.1 mg/L (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89578 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Silver. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96581 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Simazine |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89610 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Simazine | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 4 ug/L | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96638 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity |
| 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. 1 of 2 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. 1 of 2 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: | 89611 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for Specific Conductance is 900 uS/cm (Basin Plan). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96639 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Sulfates |
| 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.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 2 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 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. 2 of 2 and 0 of 2 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: | 89613 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Sulfate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for sulfate is 250 mg/L (Title 22 California Code of Regulations). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89612 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Sulfate. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-8 of The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region specifies the Sulfate objective for the Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) within the Ventura River watershed's Between Camino Cielo Road and Casitas Vista Road reach boundary as 300 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96872 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Terbacil |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89651 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Terbacil | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA Health Advisory - non cancer health, is 90 ug/L for drinking water. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Advisory: Consumer Acceptability Advice and Health Effects Analysis | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96873 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Tetrachlorvinphos |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89652 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Tetrachlorvinphos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA IRIS Reference Dose (RfD)as a drinking water level*) is 210 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | IRIS Database Calculations (summary) | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96874 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Thiobencarb/Bolero |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89653 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Thiobencarb/Bolero | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 70 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
73716 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids |
| 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 is necessary to assess listing status.
3 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 2 of the 2 samples exceed the OBJECTIVE. 0 of the 2 samples exceed the OBJECTIVE. 0 of the 34 samples exceed the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 2 of 2, 0 of 2 and 0 of 34 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this does not exceed 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 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 because applicable water quality standards are not 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: | 89686 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Dissolved Solids. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-8 of The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region specifies the Dissolved Solids objective for the Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) within the Ventura River watershed's Between Camino Cielo Road and Casitas Vista Road reach boundary as 800 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 25737 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| 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 0 out of 34 exceeded the water quality objective of 800 mg/L for TDS. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Water Quality Data Submittal and 303(d) List Recommendations | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles RWQCB Basin Plan Water Quality Objective for Selected Constituents in Inland Surface Waters--water body specific for Ventura River Reach 4--is 800 mg/L for TDS. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | VR14 sampling site is located below a bridge on Highway 33 used as a Ventura County flood gauging station (Lat 34.492778, Long -119.306389). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Grab samples taken and analyzed on monthly basis from April 2003 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) | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89687 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Dissolved Solids. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL for Dissolved Solids is 500 mg/L (Title 22 California Code of Regulations). | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR Title 22 section 64449. | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
95981 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89688 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "Water designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of the maximum contaminant levels specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, able 64444-A of section 64444 (Organic Chemicals) which is incorporated by reference into this plan." The objective is 3 ug/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
95982 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| 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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 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 2 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. 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 2 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89719 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. None of the samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival and reproduction of Ceriodaphnia dubia. One sample can have multiple toxicity test results but will be counted only once. One sample is defined as being collected on the same day at the same location with the same lab sample id (if provided). | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. Region 4 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. For SWAMP data exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms. Fourth Edition. Office of Water, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, D.C. EPA-821-R-02-013 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at stations 402BA0031 and 402BA0335. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in May 2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. Data results were recorded in the SWAMP database and followed SWAMP protocols. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96043 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Zinc |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 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 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. 0 of 2 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: | 89720 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Zinc. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96105 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH) |
| 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 0 sample 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 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. 0 of 0 sample 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: | 89571 | ||||
| Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limit for non detect sample was .005 ug/L which is greater than the evaluation guideline, therefore these data are not of sufficient resolution to determine if water quality standards are being achieved. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Region 4 Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxic Rule criteria is 0.0039 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96106 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89644 | ||||
| Pollutant: | beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Region 4 Basin Plan objective is "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxic Rule criteria is 0.014 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96691 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH) |
| 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 4 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 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. 0 of 4 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: | 89754 | ||||
| Pollutant: | delta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or delta-HCH) | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the four samples exceeded the water quality evaluation guideline criteria. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Pollutants in Ventura County, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Region Basin Plan states "No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses." | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The National Academy of Science Health Advisory criteria is 500 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Four samples were collected in waterbody Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) at sampling location Happy Valley Drain (tributary to Ventura River) Meiners Oaks-1. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in 2009 (10/14/2009 & 12/8/2009) and two samples were collected in 2010 (2/6/2010 & 3/18/2010). | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance to Ventrua County Agricultural Irrigated Land Group (VCAILG) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) dated Augus 3, 2006. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96744 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| 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.
5 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 2 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. 0 of 2, 0 of 2, 0 of 2, 0 of 2, and 0 of 2 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: | 90111 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90109 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90112 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 2 samples exceed the water quality objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Region (LARWQCB 1994): In inland surface waters the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5. Ambient pH levels shall not be changed more than 0.5 units from natural conditions as a result of waste discharge. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at 402BA0031 (Ventura River Random Site 31) and 402BA0335 (Ventura River Random Site 335). | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples collected on 5/27/2008 and 5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90108 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 90110 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||
DECISION ID |
96812 |
Region 4 |
Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) |
||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
| 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: | 2027 |
| 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 is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidences are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 9 of 38 samples exceeded the COLD guideline. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the WARM objective. 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 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. 9 of 38 and 0 of 2 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE 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 not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board 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: | 89650 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 38 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | There were nine out of 38 samples that 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 30 yards above the confluence with San Antonio Creek (R-1). | ||||
| 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): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 89649 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
| Data Reference: | RWB4 Stormwater Monitoring Council CY2008 CY2009 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters designated WARM, water temperature shall not be altered by more than 5 deg. F above the natural temperature. At no time shall these WARM-designated waters be raised above 80 deg. F as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Ventura River Reach 4 (Coyote Creek to Camino Cielo Rd) was collected at 2 monitoring sites [ Ventura River Random Site 31 - 402BA0031, Ventura River Random Site 335 - 402BA0335] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 5/27/2008-5/28/2008. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The SWAMP QAPP (2008) was followed. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program Quality Assurance Program Plan | ||||