Water Body Name: | Tapo Canyon |
Water Body ID: | CAR4034100020110722112902 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
139310 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Malathion |
Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Reason for Delisting: | Applicable WQS attained; reason for recovery unspecified |
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. 1 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 2 of the 41 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. 2 of 41 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: | 89211 | ||||
Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Malathion. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | UC Davis Aquatic Life Criteria: Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of Malathion does not exceed 0.028 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: ll. Pyrethroid insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:51-103. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 262976 | ||||
Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Malathion. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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: | Aquatic life should not be affected unacceptably if the 4-day average concentration of malathion does not exceed 0.028 ug/L (UC Davis Aquatic Life Criteria). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic life water quality criteria derived via the UC Davis method: l. Organophosphate insecticides. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 216:1-48. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139296 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Chlordane |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Calleguas Creek PCBs (7) |
TMDL Project Code: | 360 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 03/24/2006 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2 and 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 this pollutant. LOE 89420 from 2016 is not being considered because it is for the marine habitat beneficial use, which is not an assigned beneficial use of this water body. The data in this LOE were also properly considered in LOE 89418. 9 of 16 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. 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. 9 of 16 samples exceeded the criteria for warm freshwater habitat. These exceeded the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. The TMDL for Organochlorine (OC) Pesticides, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) and Siltation in Calleguas Creek, Its Tributaries, and Mugu Lagoon was approved by USEPA 3/24/2006 5. 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 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: | 89420 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Total Chlordane criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater is 0.004 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 267445 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 7 of the 9 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Total Chlordane. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 25 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The chlordane criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0043 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89418 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The chlordane criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0043 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139297 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Chloride |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (being addressed with USEPA approved TMDL) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
TMDL Name: | Calleguas Creek Boron/Sulfate/TDS (4) |
TMDL Project Code: | 357 |
Date TMDL Approved by USEPA: | 12/02/2008 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under sections 2.2 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 5 of 8 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 3 of 14 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 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. 5 of 8 and 3 of 14 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. The TMDL for Boron, Chloride, Sulfate, and TDS (Salts) in the Calleguas Creek Watershed was approved by USEPA on 12/2/2008. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be removed from the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for the pollutant are being exceeded. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89431 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 5 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 5 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Chloride. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-8 of The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region specifies the Chloride objective for Tapo Canyon within the Santa Clara River's Between Blue Cut gaging station (approx. 1 mile west of LA/Ventura county line) and A Street, Fillmore reach boundary as 100 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 258488 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 14 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chloride. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chloride criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 230000 ug/L (230 mg/L)(USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2006). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-08-14 and 2020-03-17 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139329 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 the 41 samples exceed 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 the 41 samples exceed 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89377). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 256309 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Aldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The aldrin criterion maximum concentration (expressed as a 1-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 1.5 ug/L. The criterion of 3 ug/L provided in the California Toxics Rule is an instantaneous maximum concentration and was divided by 2 in order to better represent a criterion maximum concentration (CMC) value as specified in footnote (g) of Table (b)(1) of the California Toxics Rule (2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89376 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The aldrin criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 3 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139291 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Allethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 the 34 samples exceed the GUIDELINE. 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 34samples exceeded the GUIDELINE 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: | 256741 | ||||
Pollutant: | Allethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Allethrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Allethrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 1.05 ug/L for an invertebrate (acute). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
151085 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Benthic Community Effects |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Benthic Community Effects are 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 (LOEs) associating the Benthic Community Effects decision with a water or sediment concentration of pollutants other than benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment or habitat assessment LOEs are necessary to place a water body on the 303(d) List for Benthic Community Effects. One line of evidence evaluating benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment data is/are available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. One of one benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. However, a minimum of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples are needed to assess listing status. 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 waterbody 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. One of one benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. The available information is insufficient to determine whether the waterbody/pollutant combination should be placed on the 303(d) List of impaired waters at this time. 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: | 305349 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed data for 403S03320 to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the threshold. CSCI scores were from 0.656815269 to 0.656815269. | ||||
Data Reference: | California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) Scores for the 2024 Integrated Report for Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are lethal to or that produce significant alterations in population or community ecology or receiving water biota. In addition, the health and life history characteristics of aquatic organisms in waters affected by controllable water quality factors shall not differ significantly from those for the same waters in areas unaffected by controllable water quality factors. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rehn, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Bioassessment in complex environments: designing an index for consistent meaning in different settings | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station 403S03320. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected from 6/8/2010 to 6/8/2010. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected using Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program protocols | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139298 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 the 41samples exceed 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 41 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89208). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle for would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 258423 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic organisms is 0.015 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000, with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game (with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005). | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89207 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater criterion continuous concentration to protect aquatic organisms is 0.014 ug/L (Siepmann and Finlayson 2000). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139299 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 the 34 samples exceed 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 the 34 samples exceed 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: | 259077 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved copper criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is hardness dependent. The criterion when calculated using a default hardness of 100 mg/L is 9 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139332 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | LOE 89217 has been replaced by LOE 310104 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 259317 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cyfluthrin. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for cyfluthrin is 0.2 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of cyfluthrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Cyfluthrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310104 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyfluthrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cyfluthrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for cyfluthrin is 0.2 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of cyfluthrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Cyfluthrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139334 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | LOE 89218 has been replaced by LOE 310605 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310605 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Lambda-cyhalothrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for lambda-cyhalothrin is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of lambda-cyhalothrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Lambda-cyhalothrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 262640 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cyhalothrin, Lambda | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Lambda-cyhalothrin. Although a total of 33 samples were collected, 32 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for lambda-cyhalothrin is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of lambda-cyhalothrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Lambda-cyhalothrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139333 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Deltamethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | LOE 89261 has been replaced by LOE 310319 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 260134 | ||||
Pollutant: | Deltamethrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Deltamethrin. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for deltamethrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.000026 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310319 | ||||
Pollutant: | Deltamethrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Deltamethrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for deltamethrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.000026 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139336 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Demeton |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 41 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 41 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89274). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 89273 | ||||
Pollutant: | Demeton | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Demeton. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria lists criterion continuous concentrations for Demeton to protect aquatic life in freshwater and saltwater is 0.1 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 260066 | ||||
Pollutant: | Demeton | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Demeton, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA National Recommended Water Quality criterion for demeton for freshwater aquatic life protection is 0.1 ug/l (4 day average) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139301 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Diazinon |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 41 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 41 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89275). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle for would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 260128 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater chronic value for diazinon is 0.10 ug/L (4 day average)(Finlayson, 2004). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game (with minor corrections to significant figures as described in Beaulaurier et al., 2005). | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89293 | ||||
Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The freshwater chronic value for diazinon is 0.1 ug/L, expressed as a continuous concentration (Finlayson, 2004). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water quality for diazinon. Memorandum to J. Karkoski, Central Valley RWQCB. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigation Unit, CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139302 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Dichlorvos |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | LOE 89295 has been replaced by LOE 310277 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 260364 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dichlorvos | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for dichlorvos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0058 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310277 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dichlorvos | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Dichlorvos. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for dichlorvos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0058 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
152734 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Dicofol |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | LOE 89311 has been replaced by LOE 310428 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310428 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dicofol | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dicofol. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for dicofol is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 4.4 ug/L for a fish (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-05-20 and 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139303 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 41 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 41 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89314). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 89312 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Dieldrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 260596 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dieldrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dieldrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139326 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Dimethoate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89330 has been replaced by LOE 310302 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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. None of the 29 samples exceed the criteria nd 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: | 260360 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dimethoate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 28 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 28 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dimethoate. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2013-05-21 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310302 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dimethoate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Dimethoate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for dimethoate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.5 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-05-20 and 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139304 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Disulfoton |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of the 41 samples exceed the guideline. 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 the 41 samples exceed the guideline 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: | 89341 | ||||
Pollutant: | Disulfoton | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Disulfoton. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for disulfoton is 0.05 µg/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 307350 | ||||
Pollutant: | Disulfoton | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Disulfoton. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for disulfoton is 0.05 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 samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139305 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 the 41 samples exceed 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 the 41 samples exceed 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: | 89360 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan Sulfate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life 24 hour average maximum for endosulfan sulfate is 0.056 µg/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 261002 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan sulfate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endosulfan Sulfate. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria toxicity threshold for endosulfan sulfate for freshwater aquatic life protection is 0.056 ug/l (24 hour average) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139306 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 41 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 41 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. An LOE with 7 samples with 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle. These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. Inclusion in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support. |
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: | 89362 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Endrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.036 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 261065 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The endrin criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.036 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139337 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 261114 | ||||
Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Esfenvalerate. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 33 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for esfenvalerate is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of esfenvalerate were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Esfenvalerate | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310342 | ||||
Pollutant: | Esfenvalerate/Fenvalerate | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Esfenvalerate. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for esfenvalerate is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of esfenvalerate were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Esfenvalerate | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139327 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Ethoprop |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89395 has been replaced by LOE 310493 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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 35 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: | 310493 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ethoprop | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ethoprop. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-05-20 and 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 261334 | ||||
Pollutant: | Ethoprop | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Ethoprop. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for ethoprop is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.8 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139330 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Fenthion |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 the 34 samples exceed the GUIDELINE. 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 the 34 samples exceed the GUIDELINE 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: | 261839 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fenthion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fenthion. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for fenthion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.013 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139292 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Fenvalerate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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. 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 35 samples exceeded the concentrations listed in the evaluation guideline in water and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy for warm freshwater habitat. 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: | 261769 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fenvalerate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fenvalerate. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for fenvalerate is the LC50 of 1.13 ug/L for fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas. (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310711 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fenvalerate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fenvalerate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for fenvalerate is the LC50 of 1.13 ug/L for fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas. (USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-05-20 and 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139307 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89421). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 89410 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Heptachlor criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 262140 | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Heptachlor. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The heptachlor criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139308 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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. Additionally, an LOE with 7 samples and 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle (LOE 89424). These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. These 7 samples were also assessed in 2016 for the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and are still included in the 2024 cycle for this use in addition to new data. Inclusion of the Marine Habitat LOE in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support rating. |
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: | 89422 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor Epoxide. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Heptachlor Epoxide criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 261922 | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Heptachlor Epoxide. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The heptachlor epoxide criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0038 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139309 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 41 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 7 and 0 of 41 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: | 262072 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for HCH, gamma-. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The gamma-BHC (Lindane, gamma-HCH) criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.95 ug/L. (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89433 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for BHC, gamma(Lindane). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The gamma-BHC (Lindane) criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.95 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89435 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for BHC, gamma(Lindane). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The gamma-BHC (Lindane) criterion maximum concentration to protect aquatic life in saline water is 0.16 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139293 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Methamidophos |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 263485 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methamidophos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methamidophos. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for methamifophos is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 4.5 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2013-05-21 and 2013-08-22 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139325 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Methidathion |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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. Two line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89212 has been replaced by LOE 310683 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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: | 310683 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methidathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methidathion. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for methidathion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.66 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-09-16 and 2009-08-04 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 263540 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methidathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 28 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 28 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methidathion. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for methidathion is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.66 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2013-05-21 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139311 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 41 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 41 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: | 263653 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methoxychlor | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Methoxychlor. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 ambient water quality criterion for freshwater aquatic life Criterion Continuous Concentration (CCC) expressed as a 4-day average for methoxychlor is 0.03 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 samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89220 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methoxychlor | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Methoxychlor. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national ambient water quality criteria for freshwater aquatic life instantaneous maximum for methoxychlor is 0.03 µg/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139312 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 the 41 samples exceed 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 the 41 samples exceed 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: | 89222 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, methyl. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Dept. of Fish and Game instantaneous criteria for methyl parathion is 0.08 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Hazard Assessment of the Synthetic Pyrethroid Insecticides Bifenthrin, Cypermethrin, Esfenvalerate, and Permethrin to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River System. California Department of Fish and Game. Office of Spill Prevention and Response, Administrative Report 00-6 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 264493 | ||||
Pollutant: | Methyl Parathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Parathion, Methyl. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Department of Fish and Game instantaneous aquatic life criterion for methyl parathion is 0.08 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Hazard Assessment of the Insecticide Methyl Parathion to Aquatic Organisms in the Sacramento River System | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139313 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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: | 89234 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No indvidual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneifical uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The criterion continuous concentraion for Mirex is 0.001 ug/l from the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 263588 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Mirex. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The USEPA national recommended criterion continuous concentration for mirex for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is 0.001 µg/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 samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139314 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Organophosphate Pesticides |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 the 34 samples exceed the guideline. 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 the 34 samples exceed the guideline 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: | 264266 | ||||
Pollutant: | Organophosphate Pesticides | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Organophosphorus Pesticides. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for the protection of aquatic life from the additive effects of the organophosphate pesticides chlorpyrifos and diazinon is one toxic unit equivalent. A toxic unit equivalent is equal to the sum of chlorpyrifos and diazinon from a single sample, each having their reported concentration divided their respective evaluation guideline prior to being summed. If this results in a value greater than one, the sample is considered to be in exceedance of the water quality standard. (Bailey et al., 1997). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Joint acute toxicity of Diazinon and Chlorpyrifos to Ceriodaphnia dubia. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139317 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 264656 | ||||
Pollutant: | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls). Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The PCB, total aroclors criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.014 ug/L. This value corresponds to the sum of aroclors 1242, 1254, 1221, 1232, 1248, 1260, and 1016 (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2014-08-14 to 2014-08-14 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139328 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Phorate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89276 has been replaced by LOE 310745 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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 35 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: | 310745 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phorate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phorate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-05-20 and 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 265280 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phorate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phorate. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for phorate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.21 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139331 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Phosmet |
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89279 has been replaced by LOE 310832 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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: | 310832 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosmet | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phosmet. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for phosmet is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.75 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2008-09-16 and 2009-08-04 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 265356 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosmet | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 28 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 28 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Phosmet. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for phosmet is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.75 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2013-05-21 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139295 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Prallethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of the 34 samples exceed the guideline. 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 the 34 samples exceed the guideline 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: | 265105 | ||||
Pollutant: | Prallethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Prallethrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for prallethrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.65 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139338 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Resmethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 the 34 samples exceed the GUIDELINE. 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 34samples exceeded the GUIDELINE 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: | 265705 | ||||
Pollutant: | Resmethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Resmethrin. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for resmethrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.14 ug/L for a fish (acute). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139318 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Sodium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 266603 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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: | Water Quality for Agriculture, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1985, contains criteria protective of various agricultural uses of water, including irrigation of various types of crops and stock watering. At or below the sodium threshold of 69 mg/L, agricultural uses of water should not be limited. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-24 and 2012-05-24 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139294 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | T-Fluvalinate |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 the 34 samples exceed the guideline. 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 34 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE 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: | 266906 | ||||
Pollutant: | T-Fluvalinate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for T-Fluvalinate. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for tau-fluvalinate is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.064 ug/L for a fish (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139319 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Tetrachlorvinphos |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of the 34 samples exceed the GUIDELINE. 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 34 samples exceeded the GUIDELINE 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: | 267496 | ||||
Pollutant: | Tetrachlorvinphos | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Tetrachlorvinphos. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for stirophos (tetrachlorvinphos) is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.125 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139320 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. 2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 0 sample exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 1 sample exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 0 and 0 of 1 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: | 267743 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Toxaphene. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 33 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The toxaphene criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0002 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89318 | ||||
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: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Toxaphene. Seven sample result(s) were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Toxaphene criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.0002 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89333 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxaphene | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Toxaphene. Seven sample result(s) were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Toxaphene criteria for the protection of saltwater aquatic life is 0.0002 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139321 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Turbidity |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | Insufficient information is available to determine beneficial use support for this waterbody-pollutant combination with the statistical power and confidence required by the Listing Policy. Beneficial use support will be reassessed in a future cycle, if more data are available |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, SWRCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because it cannot be determined if applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 268287 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Turbidity. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Turbidities of 40 NTU or greater can cause a reduced foraging efficiency and a shift in prey selection in piscivorous fish (largemouth bass) due to interference with their ability to find prey (Shoup, D.E. and Wahl D.H., 2009). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | The Effects of Turbidity on Prey Selection by Piscivorous Largemouth Bass | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2017-05-31 and 2019-12-04 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139300 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of the 34 samples exceed 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 34 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: | 260645 | ||||
Pollutant: | alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endosulfan I. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The endosulfan I (alpha-endosulfan) criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139315 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | 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 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of the 34 samples exceed 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 34 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: | 260883 | ||||
Pollutant: | beta-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Endosulfan II. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The endosulfan II (beta-endosulfan) criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139316 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. 3 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 12 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 11, 0 of 12 and and 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. An LOE with 11 samples with 0 exceedances for the Marine Habitat beneficial use was removed for assessment this cycle. These data were mistakenly used in the 2016 cycle. This water body is a fresh water body and does not meet the criteria for this beneficial use. The Basin Plan for the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board does not assign the Marine Habitat beneficial use to this water body, and it should not have been used for assessment in a previous cycle. Inclusion in the 2024 cycle would not have changed the beneficial use support. |
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: | 89264 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/4/2007-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89263 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Non-Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/4/2007-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89262 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for insland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/4/2007-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 264782 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for pH. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water Quality Control Plan, Los Angeles Basin: the pH for inland surface waters, bays, or estuaries shall not be depressed below 6.5 or raised above 8.5 as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2018-06-04 and 2018-06-04 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139323 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin |
Final Listing Decision: | 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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 93767 has been replaced by LOE 310326 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 7 of 7 samples exceeded the criteria and this exceeds the frequency allowed 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: | 310057 | ||||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Bifenthrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for bifenthrin is 0.1 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of bifenthrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Bifenthrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 257773 | ||||
Pollutant: | Bifenthrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 7 of the 7 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Bifenthrin. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 27 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for bifenthrin is 0.1 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of bifenthrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Bifenthrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139324 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Cypermethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | 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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89230 has been replaced by LOE 309999 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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. 3 of 3 samples exceed the CRITERIA 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: | 309999 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cypermethrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Cypermethrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for cypermethrin is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of cypermethrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Cypermethrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 259353 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cypermethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 3 of the 3 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Cypermethrin. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 31 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for cypermethrin is 0.3 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of cypermethrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Cypermethrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
149961 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) |
Final Listing Decision: | 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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. 6 of 12 samples exceeded the CRITERION. 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 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. 6 of 12 samples exceeded the CRITERIA 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. LOE 89260 is not being used in assessment because this waterbody has not been assigned the Marine Habitat beneficial use. The data used in this LOE in 2016 were also assigned to the Warm Freshwater Habitat beneficial use and assessed. |
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: | 259870 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 5 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 5 of the 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for DDT(p,p'). Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 29 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The DDT(4,4') criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.001 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion 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 | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89260 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for DDT(p,p). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The DDT criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saline water is 0.001 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89248 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for DDT(p,p). | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The DDT criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.001 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139335 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin |
Final Listing Decision: | 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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89409 has been replaced by LOE 310582 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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. 5 of 5 samples exceed the criteria 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: | 261599 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 5 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 5 of the 5 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Fenpropathrin. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 29 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Fenpropathrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0015 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310582 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fenpropathrin | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Fenpropathrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The evaluation guideline for Fenpropathrin is the USEPA Aquatic Life Benchmark of 0.0015 ug/L for an invertebrate (chronic). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Aquatic Life Benchmarks | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
150713 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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 and 3.11 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Because a statistically sufficient number of geomean samples were not available, attainment of the bacteria objective was determined based only on the STV per the situation-specific weight of evidence approach outlined in Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy. 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. 8 of 11 samples exceed the statistical threshold value for E. coli and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 302045 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | STV | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 8 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 8 of the 11 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality threshold for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective to protect the REC-1 beneficial use where the salinity is less than 1 parts per thousand 95 percent or more of the time applies a statistical threshold value to E. coli of 320 cfu/100 mL, not to be exceeded by more than 10 percent of samples within a calendar month (ISWEBE 2018). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2017-01-22 and 2020-06-02 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
149962 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. 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. 12 of 34 samples exceed the objective 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: | 302275 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrate | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 34 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 12 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 12 of 34 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Nitrate as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (page 3-34) states that: Waters shall not exceed 10 mg/L as nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-01-23 and 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
139339 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Permethrin |
Final Listing Decision: | 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)(2018) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. LOE 89252 has been replaced by LOE 310703 due to a reassessment of data using the U.S. EPA aquatic life benchmark. 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. 2 of the 2 samples exceed the CRITERIA 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: | 264965 | ||||
Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 2 of the 2 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Permethrin. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 32 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for permethrin is 1 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of permethrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Permethrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site (S04T_TAPO). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody was collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310703 | ||||
Pollutant: | Permethrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Permethrin. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 chronic criterion for permethrin is 1 ng/L (expressed as a 4-day average). If the freely dissolved concentrations of permethrin were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Water Quality Criteria Report for Permethrin | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
139322 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Pyrethroids |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2037 |
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. 3 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. 7 of 7 samples exceed the concentration listed in the evaluation guideline in water and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy for warm freshwater habitat. 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: | 265687 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrethroids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Pyrethroids. Although a total of 34 samples were collected, 34 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 summed ratios of the pyrethroid pesticides bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, permethrin and their respective chronic concentration goals are not to exceed 1. If the freely dissolved concentrations of these pesticides were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins for the Control of Pyrethroid Pesticide Discharges | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2012-01-23 to 2020-06-02 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 310933 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrethroids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
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: | Water Board staff assessed ILRP 2007-2009 data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 0 samples exceeded the evaluation guideline for Pyrethroids. Although a total of 1 samples were collected, 1 of these samples were not included in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the water quality threshold and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.5. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 summed ratios of the pyrethroid pesticides bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, permethrin and their respective chronic concentration goals are not to exceed 1. If the freely dissolved concentrations of these pesticides were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins for the Control of Pyrethroid Pesticide Discharges | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO_BKGD (S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this waterbody were collected over the date range 2008-05-20 to 2008-05-20 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 265436 | ||||
Pollutant: | Pyrethroids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed Ventura County Agriculture Irrigated Lands Group data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 7 of 7 samples exceeded the water quality threshold for Pyrethroids. | ||||
Data Reference: | WQ data from the California Environmental Data Exchange Network assembled for the 2024 Integrated Report in Region 4. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region states that: 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 summed ratios of the pyrethroid pesticides bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, permethrin and their respective chronic concentration goals are not to exceed 1. If the freely dissolved concentrations of these pesticides were reported or could be calculated then these values were used for this assessment. In the absence of freely dissolved concentrations, total concentrations were used. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Amendment to the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins for the Control of Pyrethroid Pesticide Discharges | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site: S04T_TAPO (Tapo Canyon Creek S of Hwy 126). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2014-02-28 and 2019-12-04 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | The technical Steering committee co-chairs city and county of los angeles co-chairs city and county of los angeles. 2004. SANTA MONICA BAY BEACHES BACTERIAL TMDLs COORDINATED SHORELINE MONITORING PLAN. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | VENTURA COUNTY AGRICULTURAL IRRIGATED LANDS GROUP (VCAILG) | ||||
DECISION ID |
99635 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Ammonia |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of 7 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. 1 of 7 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: | 89389 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, ammonia (Total Ammonia) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Ammonia as N, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Surface water shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect any designated beneficial use. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia – Freshwater (USEPA 2013): the 30-day rolling average concentration (criterion continuous concentration or CCC) of total ammonia nitrogen(in mg TAN/L) in freshwater are not to be exceeded more than once every three years on average. The CCC values are based on pH and temperature. The CCC formula is found on page 46 and the table of CCC values is on page 49. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater 2013 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
96565 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
2 lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 and 0 of 3 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: | 89391 | ||||
Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos Methyl. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Azinphos methyl (Guthion) criteria for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is 0.01 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Tapo Canyon Creek - S04T_TAPO] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 9/16/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89406 | ||||
Pollutant: | Azinphos-methyl (Guthion) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Azinphos Methyl. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Azinphos methyl (Guthion) criteria for the protection of saltwater aquatic life is 0.01 ug/L (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2009). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Tapo Canyon Creek - S04T_TAPO] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 9/16/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97088 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Dacthal |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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: | 89231 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dacthal | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Dacthal. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | According to the USEPA Office of Pesticide Programs Ecotoxicity database, the aquatic life LC50 for Dacthal is 6600 ug/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | OPP Pesticide Ecotoxicity Database. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97146 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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: | 89342 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
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: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan, Total. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The endosulfan criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater is 0.056 ug/L. This value corresponds to the sum of alpha-endosulfan and beta-endosulfan (USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria, 2006). | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97371 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Endrin aldehyde |
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 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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: | 89392 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin aldehyde | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin Aldehyde. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Endrin Aldehyde criteria for the protection of human health from the fish consumption component of water contact recreation (REC-1) use is 0.81 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97065 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89236 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region (page 3-11) states that: "The dissolved oxygen content of all surface waters designated as WARM shall not be depressed below 5 mg/L as a result of waste discharges." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/4/2007-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97328 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Parathion |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 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: | 89250 | ||||
Pollutant: | Parathion | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for Parathion, Ethyl. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The criterion continuous concentraion for Parathion, Ethyl is 0.013 ug/l from the National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Tapo Canyon Creek - S04T_TAPO] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 9/16/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97444 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status.
1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 11 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89315 | ||||
Pollutant: | Temperature, water | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 11 samples exceed the criterion for Water Temperature. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters designated WARM, water temperature shall not be altered by more than 5 deg. F above the natural temperature. At no time shall these WARM-designated waters be raised above 80 deg. F as a result of waste discharges. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 6/4/2007-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
100364 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d)
List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. 1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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 waterbody-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: | 96186 | ||||
Pollutant: | alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or alpha-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for BHC, alpha. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The BHC, alpha criteria for the protection of human health from 30-day average fish consumption component of water contact recreation (REC-1) use is 0.013 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
99700 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d)
List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence are necessary to assess listing status. 1 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 7 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 7 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: | 96199 | ||||
Pollutant: | beta-BHC (Benzenehexachloride or beta-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Ag waiver data for Boulder Creek (Ventura County) to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceed the criterion for BHC, beta. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The BHC, beta criteria for the protection of human health from30-day average fish consumption component of water contact recreation (REC-1) use is 0.046 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97032 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) |
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 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
2 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 3 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 2 of 5 samples exceeded the WATER TOXICITY 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. 3 of 3 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and 2 of 5 samples exceeded the WATER TOXICITY GUIDELINE. These 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 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: | 89233 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDD (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 3 samples exceed the criterion for DDD(p,p). Four sample result(s) were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The DDD(p,p) criterion for the protection of human health from the fish consumption component of water contact recreation (REC-1) use is 0.00084 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
99701 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) |
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: | 2029 |
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. 4 of 4 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 2 of 5 samples exceeded the WATER TOXICITY 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. 4 of 4 samples exceeded the CRITERIA and 2 of 5 samples exceeded the WATER TOXICITY GUIDELINE. These 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 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: | 89343 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Fivesamples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Two of the five samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Hyalella azteca, cell density for Thalassiosira pseudonana, survival and growth of Americamysis bahia, and total cell count for Selenastrum capricornutum. Statistically significant toxicity to Thalassiosira pseudonana was observed on (6/4/2007) and Selenastrum capricornutum on 8/4/2009. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
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. Region 4 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. 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 sample was collected at Tapo Canyon Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in June and September 2007, January and September 2008 and August 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96213 | ||||
Pollutant: | DDE (Dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 4 samples exceed the criterion for DDE(p,p). Three sample result(s) were not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | No individual pesticide or combination of pesticides shall be present in concentrations that affect beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The DDE-4,4' criteria for the protection of human health from 30-day average fish consumption component of water contact recreation (REC-1) use is 0.00059 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). | ||||
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: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97386 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Sulfates |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 6 of 8 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 6 of 8 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89297 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 6 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 6 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Sulfate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-8 of The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region specifies the Sulfate objective for Tapo Canyon within the Santa Clara River's Between Blue Cut gaging station (approx. 1 mile west of LA/Ventura county line) and A Street, Fillmore reach boundary as 600 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97445 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | A Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 7 of 8 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 7 of 8 samples exceeded the OBJECTIVE and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 89316 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 8 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 7 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | State Water Board staff assessed Agwaiver data for Tapo Canyon to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 7 of 8 samples exceed the criterion for Dissolved Solids. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-8 of The Water Quality Control Plan for the Los Angeles Region specifies the Dissolved Solids objective for Tapo Canyon within the Santa Clara River's Between Blue Cut gaging station (approx. 1 mile west of LA/Ventura county line) and A Street, Fillmore reach boundary as 1300 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Tapo Canyon was collected at 1 monitoring site [ S04T_TAPO background site upstream of agricultural operations - S04T_TAPO_BKGD] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/5/2008-8/4/2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan from Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97447 |
Region 4 |
Tapo Canyon |
||
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 3.1 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. 2 of 5 samples exceeded the CRITERIA. 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. 2 of 5 samples exceeded the CRITERIA 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: | 89343 | ||||
Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Fivesamples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Two of the five samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Hyalella azteca, cell density for Thalassiosira pseudonana, survival and growth of Americamysis bahia, and total cell count for Selenastrum capricornutum. Statistically significant toxicity to Thalassiosira pseudonana was observed on (6/4/2007) and Selenastrum capricornutum on 8/4/2009. | ||||
Data Reference: | Data for various Pollutants from the Ag Waiver Program, 2007-2009. | ||||
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. Region 4 Basin Plan. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan Los Angeles Region R4 Basin Plan | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. 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 sample was collected at Tapo Canyon Creek. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The sample was collected in June and September 2007, January and September 2008 and August 2009. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data quality is good. A QAPP and monitoring plan was submitted. Data was collected by the Ventura County Agricultural Irrigated Lands Group for Order No. R4- 2005-0080.) | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||