Water Body Name: | Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
Water Body ID: | CAR4052100019990202090157 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
72373 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Scum/Foam-unnatural |
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: | Other |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollution |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this water body condition. A nitrogen TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the nitrogen standard. Qualitative information on scum/foam-unnatural alone is not sufficient to support placement on the section 303(d) list (Listing Policy section 3.7). It is expected that this TMDL will address the pollutant(s) contributing to or causing these conditions. The Los Angeles River Nitrogen TMDL was approved by RWQCB on August 19, 2003 and subsequently approved by USEPA on March 18, 2004. This TMDL will address this water body condition. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2506 | ||||
Pollutant: | Scum/Foam-unnatural | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A TMDL and implementation plan has been approved for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Los Angeles River Nitrogen TMDL was approved by RWQCB on August 19, 2003 and subsequently approved by USEPA on March 18, 2004. This TMDL will address this water body condition. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
69968 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Taste and odor |
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: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the section 303(d) list under section 4 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this water body condition. A nitrogen TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the nitrogen standard. Qualitative information on taste and odor alone is not sufficient to support placement on the section 303(d) list (Listing Policy section 3.7). It is expected that this TMDL will address the pollutant(s) contributing to or causing this condition. The Los Angeles River Nitrogen TMDL was approved by RWQCB on August 19, 2003 and subsequently approved by USEPA on March 18, 2004. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2505 | ||||
Pollutant: | Taste and odor | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70709 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Lead |
Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Reason for Delisting: | Applicable WQS attained; due to restoration activities |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 12/22/2005 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under this section 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. 1 of the 93 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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 93 and 0 of 0 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 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 removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant 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: | 86010 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the 93 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2511 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a listing decision made by USEPA for 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
68391 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Ammonia |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Nitrogen (11) |
TMDL Project Code: | 229 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/18/2004 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal from the CWA section 303(d) List under section 4.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 4.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant. 0 of 0 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 33 of 111 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from 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 0 and 33 of 111 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 86019 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 51 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 13 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 13 out of 51 monthly averages exceeded the site specific basin plan objective for total ammonia as nitrogen. All exceedences occurred 2007 and prior. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | he Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Plan objective for ammonia is a function of pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages. Site specific objectives for this waterbody are based upon the presence of early life stages and found in Table 3-4. "Site-Specific 30-day Average Objectives for Ammonia by Waterbody Reach." Site specific objectives are applied as if early life stages are absent (dates ranging October 1 to March 31). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected in three locations: LAG R4, LAG R5, and LAG R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected weekly from 07/2005 through 06/2010. Only samples collected from the months of October 1 to March 31 have been included. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | All samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85894 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 60 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 20 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 20 out of 60 monthly averages exceeded the site specific basin plan objective for total ammonia as nitrogen. All the exceedences were 2007 and prior. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Plan objective for ammonia is a function of pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages. Site specific objectives for this waterbody are based upon the presence of early life stages and found in Table 3-4. "Site-Specific 30-day Average Objectives for Ammonia by Waterbody Reach." Site specific objectives are applied as if early life stages are present (dates ranging April 1 to September 30). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected in three locations: LAG R4, LAG R5, and LAG R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected weekly from 07/2005 through 06/2010. Only samples collected from the months of April 1 to September 30 have been included. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | All samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2507 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
69733 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Metals (13) |
TMDL Project Code: | 237 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 10/29/2008 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2 and 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under SECTION 3.1 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are 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 removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by RWQCB and USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. 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. 8 of 93 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and these exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1of the Listing Policy. 4. The Los Angeles Metals TMDL was approved by USEPA on 12/22/2005 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. There is sufficient justification to place this waterbody/pollutant in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The Los Angeles River Metals TMDL was approved by USEPA on 10/29/2008. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85997 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Eight of the 93 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2510 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a listing decision made by USEPA for 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96798 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane |
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 6 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 6 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: | 85990 | ||||
Pollutant: | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All of the samples were below criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 USEPA National Recomm. WQ criteria, chronic tox info, is 9,400 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, two samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96799 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Acrolein |
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 6 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 6 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: | 85991 | ||||
Pollutant: | Acrolein | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All of the samples were below criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 USEPA National Recomm. WQ criteria, 4-day avg. is 3 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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96088 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 24 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 24 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: | 85992 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 24 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All of the samples were below criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 California Toxics Rule, instantaneous max. is 1.5 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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96089 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 24 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 24 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: | 85993 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 46 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 46 samples exceeded the CTR. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The CTR for arsenic is 150 ug/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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
99749 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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, additional lines of evidence associating the Benthic Community Effects with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants and there are multiple lines of evidence for other impairments. Three samples were collected from the Los Angeles River Reach 3 over three years. Four of the four samples collected had an IBI score below 40. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing Benthic Community Effects in this water segment on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three samples were collected from Los Angeles River Reach 3over two years. Four of the four samples collected had an IBI score below 40. However, the Los Angeles Water Board has identified this waterbody as needing further monitoring and data collection. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | The CSCI is applicable statewide, accounts for a much wider range of natural variability, and provides equivalent scoring thresholds in all regions of the state. The CSCI will be used in the future for water quality assessment purposes statewide over the regional indices of biologic integrity (IBIs). |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85894 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 60 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 20 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 20 out of 60 monthly averages exceeded the site specific basin plan objective for total ammonia as nitrogen. All the exceedences were 2007 and prior. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Plan objective for ammonia is a function of pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages. Site specific objectives for this waterbody are based upon the presence of early life stages and found in Table 3-4. "Site-Specific 30-day Average Objectives for Ammonia by Waterbody Reach." Site specific objectives are applied as if early life stages are present (dates ranging April 1 to September 30). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected in three locations: LAG R4, LAG R5, and LAG R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected weekly from 07/2005 through 06/2010. Only samples collected from the months of April 1 to September 30 have been included. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | All samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 86019 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 51 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 13 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 13 out of 51 monthly averages exceeded the site specific basin plan objective for total ammonia as nitrogen. All exceedences occurred 2007 and prior. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | he Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Plan objective for ammonia is a function of pH, temperature, and the presence of early life stages. Site specific objectives for this waterbody are based upon the presence of early life stages and found in Table 3-4. "Site-Specific 30-day Average Objectives for Ammonia by Waterbody Reach." Site specific objectives are applied as if early life stages are absent (dates ranging October 1 to March 31). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected in three locations: LAG R4, LAG R5, and LAG R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected weekly from 07/2005 through 06/2010. Only samples collected from the months of October 1 to March 31 have been included. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | All samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 86010 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the 93 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2511 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a listing decision made by USEPA for 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85997 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Eight of the 93 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2510 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a listing decision made by USEPA for 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2504 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nutrients (Algae) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85936 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 75 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 29 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Seventy-five samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Twenty-nine of the 75 samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included acute toxicity using Atherinops affinis and chronic toxicity using Ceriodaphnia dubia, Selenastrum capricornutum and Pimephales promelas. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
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. The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. | ||||
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 Los Angeles River R4, R5 and R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected every three months from November 2005 to May 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Toxicity testing methods and requirements are in the NPDES permit CA0053953. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2507 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ammonia | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85994 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Four samples were collected from two sites on the Los Angeles River over two years. Four of the four samples collected had IBI scores below 40. The scores were 7 and 0 (2006) and 17 and 0 (2007). | ||||
Data Reference: | Bioassessment Monitoring Report in Los Angeles County, 2006-2008. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant or animal, or aquatic life. Compliance with this objective will be determined by use of indicator organisms, analysis of species diversity, population density, growth anomalies, bioassays of appropriate duration or other appropriate methods as specified by the State or Regional Board. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The IBI is a multi-metric assessment that employs biological metrics that respond to a habitat or water quality impairment. Each of the biological metrics measured at a site are converted to an IBI score then summed. These cumulative scores are then ranked. For the Southern California IBI, sites with scores below 40 are considered to have impaired conditions. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of a Benthic Index of Biotic Integrity (B-IBI) for Wadeable Streams in Northern Coastal California and its Application to Regional 305(b) Assessment | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from Los Angeles River near confluence with Arroyo Seco Channel, station 12 and Los Angeles River at Victory Blvd, station 11. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected in 2006 and 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Qaulity assurance is good. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW) contracted Weston Solutions, Inc. to perform biological assessments. Sampling and analysis followed the protocols described in the California Stream Bioassessment Procedure (CSBP) (Harrington, 2003), and also incorporated the Southern California Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) (Ode et al., 2005). | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2508 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The Los Angeles River Trash TMDL was completed by the Regional Board on September 19, 2001 (USEPA, 2002) to address impairments caused by trash. However, on July 19, 2006 the State Board rescinded approval of this TMDL and remanded it back to the Regional Board based on court ruling City of Arcadia v. State Water Resources Control Board (D043877). | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 28079 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A TMDL has been approved for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Trash TMDL for the Los Angeles River Watershed was adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB on August 09, 2007 and subsequently approved by USEPA. The TMDL was been integrated into the Basin Plan as Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2007-012. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA information unavailable. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96090 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Cadmium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 95 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 95 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: | 85995 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 95 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All of the samples were below criteria. (Total recoverable cadmium was analyzed for.) | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 California Toxics Rule (USEPA), 4-day avg., dissolved, is 2.2 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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96800 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 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. 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: | 85996 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
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: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All of the samples were below the reporting limit, which was above criteria. Therefore, non of the samples can be used with confidence. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 CTR CCC for Chlordane is 0.0043 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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96091 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Cyanide |
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. 1 of 95 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. 1 of 95 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: | 85998 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyanide | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 95 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the ninty-five samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) for cyanide of 5.2 ug/L to protect aquatic life in freshwater. | ||||
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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
100591 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) |
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 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 samples exceed 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 23 samples exceed the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 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. 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: | 85999 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the twenty three samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for sum of DDD is 28.0 ug/Kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Sediment samples were collected at station LA River R4, LA River R5 and LA River R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected in 2006 on February 7 and August 2, and in 2007 on February 7. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96144 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) |
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 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 samples exceed 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 23 samples exceed the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 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. 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: | 86000 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the twenty three samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for sum of DDE is 31.3 ug/Kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Sediment samples were collected at station LA River R4, LA River R5 and LA River R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected in 2006 on February 7 and August 2, and in 2007 on February 7. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96259 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least two lines of evidence are necessary to assess listing status for pollutants sediment, and pollutant concentrations in sediment must be associated with sediment toxicity to justify adding that pollutant to the CWA section 303(d) List.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 samples exceed 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 23 samples exceed the GUIDELINE and this sample size is INSUFFICIENT to determine beneficial use support, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy. There is not an associated sediment toxicity data as required by Section 3.6 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. 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: | 86001 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the twenty three samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for sum of DDT is 62.9 ug/Kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Sediment samples were collected at station LA River R4, LA River R5 and LA River R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected in 2006 on February 7 and August 2, and in 2007 on February 7. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96201 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 24 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 24 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: | 86002 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 24 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | All of the samples were below criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 California Toxics Rule (USEPA), 4-day avg., is 0.056 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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96145 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 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 23 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: | 86003 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 23 samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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: | 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: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96146 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 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 23 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: | 86004 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 23 samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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: | California Toxic Rule criteria fresh aquatic life protection continuous concentration (4-day average)is 0.036 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: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96028 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 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. 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: | 86007 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
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 the non-detect sample was 0.01 ug/L which is equal to the water quality objective, therefore these data are not of sufficient resolution to determine if water quality standards are being achieved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
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: | California Toxic Rule criteria fresh aquatic life protection continuous concentration (4-day average)is 0.0038 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: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96027 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 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. 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: | 86009 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
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 the non-detect sample was 0.01 ug/L which is equal to the water quality objective, therefore these data are not of sufficient resolution to determine if water quality standards are being achieved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
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: | California Toxic Rule criteria fresh aquatic life protection continuous concentration (4-day average)is 0.0038 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: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96092 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Mercury |
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 95 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 95 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: | 86011 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 95 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 95 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations (4-day average concentrations) for freshwater aquatic organisms exposure to elemental mercury is 0.77 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96147 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 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 23 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: | 86012 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methoxychlor | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 23 samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
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 Nationally Recommended Criteria for fresh aquatic life protection continuous concentration (4-day average)is 0.03 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96200 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 23 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 23 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: | 86016 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 23 samples exceeded the water quality criteria/objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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: | California Toxic Rule criteria fresh aquatic life protection maximum concentration (instantaneous) 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: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96203 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Nickel |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 46 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 46 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: | 86017 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 46 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 46 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96258 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 398 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 398 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: | 86018 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 398 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 398 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 from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 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 Los Angeles River Reach 3 is 8 mg/L. From table 3-8 titled "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 in three locations: LAG R4, LAG R5, and LAG R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected weekly from 07/2005 through 06/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | All samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96320 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 3 of 542 samples exceeded 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. 3 of 542 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: | 85895 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 542 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 542 averages of Dissolved Oxygen concentration had 3 exceedences. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Dissolved Oxygen Water Quality Objective of all surface waters designated as Warm Fresh Water Aquatic Habitat shall not be depressed below 5mg/l. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the R-4, R-5, and R-7 monitoring locations. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately once a week from July 2005 to June 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Toxicity testing methods and requirements are in the NPDES permit CA0056227. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96861 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
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 23 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 23 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 0 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 0 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 23 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 23, 0 of 23, 0 of 0, 0 of 0 and 0 of 23 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 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: | 85911 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCB (Polychlorinated biphenyl)-1260 | ||||
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: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limits for all 23 of the non-detect samples were greater than the criteria, therefore were not used in this assessment. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 CTR for freshwater habitat, continuous concentration, is 0.014 ug/L for total PCBs. | ||||
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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85896 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCB (Polychlorinated biphenyl)-1242 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limits for all 23 of the non-detect samples were greater than the criteria, therefore were not used in this assessment. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 CTR for freshwater habitat, continuous concentration, is 0.014 ug/L for total PCBs. | ||||
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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85897 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCB (Polychlorinated biphenyl)-1248 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limits for all 23 of the non-detect samples were greater than the criteria, therefore were not used in this assessment. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 CTR for freshwater habitat, continuous concentration, is 0.014 ug/L for total PCBs. | ||||
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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85898 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCB (Polychlorinated biphenyl)-1254 | ||||
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: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limits for all 23 of the non-detect samples were greater than the criteria, therefore were not used in this assessment. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 CTR for freshwater habitat, continuous concentration, is 0.014 ug/L for total PCBs. | ||||
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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 85912 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Sediment | ||||
Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 23 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the twenty three samples exceeded the evaluation guideline. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | In freshwater sediments the probable effect concentration (predictive of sediment toxicity) for total PCBs is 676 ug/Kg dry weight. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Sediment samples were collected at station LA River R4, LA River R5 and LA River R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected in 2006 on February 7 and August 2, and in 2007 on February 7. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
95968 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 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. 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: | 85913 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pentachlorophenol (PCP) | ||||
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: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The reporting limits for all 23 of the non-detect samples were greater than the criteria, therefore were not used in this assessment. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface waters 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 California Toxic Rule, 4-day avg. at pH 6.5 is 4 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 River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96260 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Selenium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 31 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 31 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: | 85915 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 31 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 31 samples exceeded the criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The CTR for selenium is 5.0 ug/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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96261 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 31 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 31 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: | 85932 | ||||
Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 31 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 31 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion maximum concentrations for silver to protect aquatic life in freshwater (1-hour average). The silver 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. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
99190 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 235 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is not 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. 0 of 235 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: | 85933 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 235 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of the 235 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for water temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters designated as WARM, water temperature shall not be altered more than 5 degrees F above the natural temperature. At no time shall these WARM designated waters be raised above 80 degrees F as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | At no time shall these WARM designated waters be raised above 80 degrees F | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Fish introductions in CA: History and impact on native fishes. Davis, CA: University of CA, Davis | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at three locations in Reach 3 of the Los Angeles River: Site 1: Lat. 34.1377167 Lon. -118.2753667, Site 2: Lat. 34.1348333 Lon. -118.2745333, Site 3: Lat. 34.1228333 Lon. -118.2704500 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples collected between July 2005 and June 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL Prepared for The Analysts, Supervisors, and Managers of the Environmental Monitoring Division ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, December 2009 | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
100444 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 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. 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: | 85935 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
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: | Since the criteria is smaller than the reporting limit and method detection limit, none of samples can be counted. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
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: | Criteria Continuous Concentration (4-day Average) is 0.0002 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: | A total of 23 samples were collected at sampling locations, LA RIVER R-4 (9 samples), LA River R-5 (5 samples) and LA River R-7 (9 samples). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | 23 samples from 2006 - 2010 were collected. At LA RIVER R-4, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. At LA River R-5, two samples in 2006, two samples in 2007, and one sample in 2008 were collected. LA River R-7 two samples in 2007, two samples in 2008, two samples in 2009, and one sample in 2010 were collected. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental conditions reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING DIVISION (EMD) BUREAU OF SANITATION DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES submitted QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL (QA) dated December 2009. The Quality Assurance Manual documents the QA Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
95930 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 93 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 93 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: | 85953 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 93 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the 93 samples exceeded the hardness adjusted criteria. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. If no hardness data were available, a value of 100 mg/L was used. | ||||
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: | The River was sampled between Figueroa St. and Riverside Dr. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in 2007, two samples was collected in 2008, three samples were collected in 2009, and one sample was collected in 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | There was no special environmental condition reported. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The samples were collected by the Environmental Monitoring Division of the City of Los Angeles using a quality assurance program for all laboratory analysis. These laboratories are individually certified by the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (ELAP) of the California Department of Health Services.los angeles river | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
100445 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
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 is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 7 of 542 samples exceeded 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. 7 of 542 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: | 85914 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 542 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Seven of the 542 samples exceeded the objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH of all inland surface waters 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: | Samples were collected from the R-4, R-5, and R-7 monitoring locations. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately once a week from July 2005 to June 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Toxicity testing methods and requirements are in the NPDES permit CA0056227. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
100454 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Toxicity |
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 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 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. 29 of 75 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE. 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. 29 of 75 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE and this exceeds 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 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: | 85936 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 75 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 29 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Seventy-five samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Twenty-nine of the 75 samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included acute toxicity using Atherinops affinis and chronic toxicity using Ceriodaphnia dubia, Selenastrum capricornutum and Pimephales promelas. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. | ||||
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. The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. | ||||
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 Los Angeles River R4, R5 and R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected every three months from November 2005 to May 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Toxicity testing methods and requirements are in the NPDES permit CA0053953. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94397 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Pathogens (15) |
TMDL Project Code: | 238 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/23/2012 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.3 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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. 237 of 247 and 202 of 330 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. There is sufficient justification to place this waterbody/pollutant in the Being Addressed portion of the CWA 303(d) List because a TMDL has been completed and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The Los Angeles River Bacteria TMDL was approved by USEPA on 03/23/2012. |
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: | 86006 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 247 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 237 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two hundred and thirty-seven of the the 247 geometric means exceeded the E. coli objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The E. coli density shall not exceed 126/100 ml. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at Los Angeles River R4, R5 and R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a week from 2006 to May 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES permit no. CA0053953 | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 86005 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 330 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 202 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two hundred and two of the the 330 samples exceeded the E. coli objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data from Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES Permit no. CA0053953, Jul. 2005-Jun. 2010 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The E. coli density shall not exceed 235/100 ml. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Bacteria - 1986. EPA440/5-84-002 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at Los Angeles River R4, R5 and R7. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a week from 2006 to May 2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The quality assurance manual for the Environmental Monitoring Division Bureau of Sanitation, Department of Public Works, City of Los Angeles was provided. Los Angeles-Glendale Water Reclamation Plant NPDES permit no. CA0053953 | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
68871 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Nutrients (Algae) |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Nonpoint Source | Point Source |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Nitrogen (11) |
TMDL Project Code: | 229 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/18/2004 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for listing under section 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under this section of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. A TMDL has been developed and approved by USEPA and an approved implementation plan is expected to result in attainment of the standard. The Los Angeles River Nitrogen TMDL was approved by RWQCB on August 19, 2003 and subsequently approved by USEPA on March 18, 2004. This TMDL will address this water body condition. 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 in the Water Quality Limited Segments Being Addressed portion of the section 303(d) list. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2504 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nutrients (Algae) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
68157 |
Region 4 |
Los Angeles River Reach 3 (Figueroa St. to Riverside Dr.) |
||
Pollutant: | Trash |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (being addressed by USEPA approved TMDL)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Nonpoint Source | Surface Runoff | Urban Runoff/Storm Sewers |
TMDL Name: | Los Angeles River Trash (12) |
TMDL Project Code: | 365 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 07/24/2008 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for removal on the section 303(d) list under sections 2.2 of the Listing Policy. Under 2.2 of the Policy, a minimum of one line of evidence is needed to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are 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 removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. There is sufficient justification to place it in the Being Addressed portion of the 303(d) list because a TMDL has been completed and adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB and approved by USEPA, and is expected to result in attainment of the standard. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | This is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 28079 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | A TMDL has been approved for this water segment-pollutant combination. The Trash TMDL for the Los Angeles River Watershed was adopted by the Los Angeles RWQCB on August 09, 2007 and subsequently approved by USEPA. The TMDL was been integrated into the Basin Plan as Attachment A of Regional Board Resolution No. 2007-012. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA information unavailable. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 2508 | ||||
Pollutant: | Trash | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Narrative Description Data | ||||
Matrix: | Not Specified | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The Los Angeles River Trash TMDL was completed by the Regional Board on September 19, 2001 (USEPA, 2002) to address impairments caused by trash. However, on July 19, 2006 the State Board rescinded approval of this TMDL and remanded it back to the Regional Board based on court ruling City of Arcadia v. State Water Resources Control Board (D043877). | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference 2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | |||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | |||||
Temporal Representation: | |||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QA Info Missing | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||