Water Body Name: | East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
Water Body ID: | CAR6301001020011204100242 |
Water Body Type: | River & Stream |
DECISION ID |
78066 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Manganese |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2028 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess pollutant, two of which are based on the same data assessed for MUN and COLD. Eight of eight samples exceed the guideline for MUN and zero of four samples exceed the guideline for COLD. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Eight of eight samples exceed the guideline for MUN and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 4.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7711 | ||||
Pollutant: | Manganese | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled manganese under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Concentrations of dissolved manganese in four samples ranged from 11.6 to 36.5 ug/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There are no state or federal standards or criteria for manganese for the protection of aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5085 | ||||
Pollutant: | Manganese | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled manganese under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Total manganese concentrations in 4 samples ranged from 82 to 119 ug/L. All four samples exceeded the MCL. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The secondary MCL for manganese is 50 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99047 | ||||
Pollutant: | Manganese | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 4 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Manganese. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region¦s Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). The secondary maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Manganese is 0.05 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
DECISION ID |
77881 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Turbidity |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2028 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, for that assess for MUN and two that assess for COLD, however the COLD turbidity objective requires background data that is not available so the lines of evidence for COLD could not be assessed. Eighteen of 66 samples exceed the MUN guideline for turbidity. 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. Eighteen of 66 samples exceed the MUN guideline 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5056 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured turbidity under the Region 6 SWAMP program at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2004. Twelve turbidity samples reported as NTU ranged from below the detection level to 12 NTU. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The applicable objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan states: "Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses. Increases in turbidity shall not exceed natural levels by more than 10 percent." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Twelve samples reported as NTU were collected quarterly from 2001 to 2004. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5057 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured turbidity under the Region 6 SWAMP program at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2004. Turbidity in 12 samples ranged from below the detection level to 12 NTU. The MCL was exceeded in 9 of the 12 samples. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for turbidity is 5 NTU. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Twelve samples reported as NTU were collected quarterly between 2001 to 2004. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96866 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 44 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 9 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by Lahontan staff for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) RWB6 Monitoring program, and for a supplemental TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. The TMDL Special Study was developed by Lahontan Planning and SWAMP staff to provide additional data to the quarterly SWAMP monitoring. The purpose was to gain a better temporal understanding of levels of specific pollutants in the waterbody. To ensure the two datasets could be viably analyzed as one, the TMDL Special Study followed the same sampling protocol as SWAMP. Accordingly, the two datasets have been combined for this assessment to reflect the intended design and to best characterize conditions in the watershed. Data for the projects were collected between September 2010 and March 2017. Turbidity concentrations ranged from 1.25 to 8.67 NTU. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for turbidity is 5 NTU. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one monitoring location, 630EWK001, which is located just upstream of the CA/NV stateline. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between September 2010 and March 2017 with predominately a twice-per-quarter frequency. More visits were made to the site in the warmer months compared with winter months. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99085 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Turbidity. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL) based upon drinking water standards specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The Lahontan Basin Plan also has regionwide turbidity objective for other beneficial uses that states: Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses. Increases in turbidity shall not exceed natural levels by more than 10%. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient surface waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's \Chemical Constituents\" objective. The Secondary MCL for turbidity is 5 NTU. Calculation of a numeric objective for other beneficial uses requires comparison with upstream or other background data which may not be available as part of the data used for water quality assessment. " | ||||
Guideline Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7718 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured turbidity under the Region 6 SWAMP program at quarterly intervals between 2004 and 2005. Turbidity in 4 samples ranged from 2 to 4.2 NTRU. Since the MCL is expressed as NTU these samples cannot be used to assess compliance. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for turbidity is 5 NTU. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four samples reported as NTRU were collected quarterly between 2004 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7717 | ||||
Pollutant: | Turbidity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured turbidity under the Region 6 SWAMP program at quarterly intervals between 2004 and 2005. Turbidity in 4 samples ranged from 2 to 4.2 NTRU. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The applicable objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan states: "Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses. Increases in turbidity shall not exceed natural levels by more than 10 percent." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four samples reported as NTU were collected quarterly in 2004 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
102635 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Aldrin |
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 Staff 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.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one samples exceed the tissue guideline for Aldrin. 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. Zero of one 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99185 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Aldrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Aldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102589 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 |
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 Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 32 samples exceed the guideline for alkalinity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 32 samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99039 | ||||
Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Alkalinity as CaCO3. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for Alkalinity as CaCO3 for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is not less than 20000 ug/L. (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria 2016) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98181 | ||||
Pollutant: | Alkalinity as CaCO3 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 26 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 26 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Alkalinity as CaCO3. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for Alkalinity as CaCO3 for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is not less than 20000 ug/L. (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria 2016) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
103814 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Anatoxin-A |
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 Staff 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.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that consists of a single tissue sample. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for Anatoxin-a. 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. Zero of one 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99633 | ||||
Pollutant: | Anatoxin-A | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Anatoxin-A. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The 5000 ng/g wet weight action level for Anatoxin-A for edible sport fish and shellfish identifies the maximum concentration of cyanotoxins that a typical consumer (one meal per week) could ingest without exceeding the reference dose.(OEHHA 2012) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102611 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Barium |
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 Staff 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 are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the three samples exceed the guideline for barium. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of three samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98997 | ||||
Pollutant: | Barium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Barium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for barium incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 1 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
DECISION ID |
103498 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
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 Staff 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 available in the administrative record to assess this indicator. 0 of 1 benthic-macroinvertebrate samples exceed the California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) impairment threshold. The available information indicates that the waterbody is likely unimpaired for Benthic Community Effects and therefore no other pollutant LOEs need be associated with this decision at this time. However, a minimum of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples are needed to fully assess listing status. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information to justify placement of 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. 0 of 1 benthic-macroinvertebrate bioassessment samples had CSCI scores below 0.79. Therefore, this water body is not exceeding the water quality threshold for the protection of the COLD beneficial use. However, a minimum of two benthic-macroinvertebrate samples are needed to fully assess listing status. 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96350 | ||||
Pollutant: | Benthic-Macroinvertebrate Bioassessments | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Population/Community Degradation | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Benthic macroinvertebrate surveys | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The site had a CSCI score of 0.83583581. This score indicates that this site is supporting aquatic life beneficial uses and that the water quality objective is met. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys. | ||||
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 for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI) is a biological scoring tool that helps aquatic resource managers translate complex data about benthic macroinvertebrates found living in a stream into an overall measure of stream health. The CSCI score is calculated by comparing the expected condition with actual (observed) results (Rhen, A.C. et al., 2015). CSCI scores range from 0 (highly degraded) to greater than 1 (equivalent to reference). CSCI scoring of biological condition are as follows (per the scientific paper supporting the development of the CSCI scoring tool): greater than or equal to 0.92 = likely intact condition, 0.91 to 0.80 = possibly altered condition, 0.79 to 0.63 = likely altered condition, less than or equal to 0.62 = very likely altered condition. Sites with scores below 0.79 are considered to have exceeded the water quality objective for the aquatic life beneficial use. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | The California Stream Condition Index (CSCI): A New Statewide Biological Scoring Tool for Assessing the Health of Freshwater Streams. | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples collected at site 630PS0163. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sample collected on 6/15/2015. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP for SWAMP Perennial Stream Surveys | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
71589 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Boron |
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 | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two that assess the MUN guideline and one that assesses the site specific objective for boron for COLD. Zero of the six samples exceed the MUN guideline and two of six samples exceed the site specific objective for Boron that applies above for the East Walker River Bridgeport Reservoir. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the six samples exceed the MUN guideline and two of six samples exceed the site specific objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 32242 | ||||
Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of 2 samples exceeded the California State Notification Level criterion. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect the water for beneficial uses. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The California State Notification Level criterion for boron is 1 mg/L. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Drinking Water Notification Levels and Response Levels | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected at the following station: 630EWK001 East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected: 11/8/2007 8/14/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7686 | ||||
Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled boron under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2002 and 2005. Boron concentrations in 9 samples ranged from 39 to 178 ug/L. The criterion was not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California State Notification Level criterion for boron is 1000 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Drinking Water Notification and Response Levels: An Overview | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Nine quarterly samples were collected between 2002 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. Boron in this watershed is from natural sources. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96893 | ||||
Pollutant: | Boron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected as part of regional routine SWAMP monitoring. Data were collected from one site between 2010 and 2015. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 0.0324 to 0.626 mg/L. Six annual averages were computed, two of which exceeded the water quality objective in 2014 and 2015. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for boron in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 0.12 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters above Bridgeport Reservoir it has been used to assess the waters below the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one location, 630EWK001, which is located just upstream of the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between October 2010 and October 2015 predominantly once per quarter. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected in accordance with the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102636 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Chlordane |
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 Staff 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 that are based on the same single fish tissue sample assessed for COLD and COMM. The single sample does not exceed the tissue guideline for either COLD or COMM. 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. Zero of one samples exceeded the tissue guideline for COLD and COMM 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99523 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Total Chlordanes. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Chlordane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99522 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chlordane | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Total Chlordanes. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in fish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
69937 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Chloride |
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 | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two that assess for MUN and one that assess for COLD based on the Basin Plan site specific objective. Zero of the 18 samples exceed the guideline for MUN and one of six samples exceed the site specific objective for chloride. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 18 samples exceeded the MUN guideline and one of six samples exceed the site specific objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96894 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected as part of regional routine SWAMP monitoring. Data were collected from one site between 2010 and 2015. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 0.83 to 5.35 mg/L. Six annual averages were computed, one of which exceeded the water quality objective in 2015. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for chloride in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 4.0 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters above Bridgeport Reservoir it has been used to assess the waters below the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one location, 630EWK001, which is located just upstream of the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between October 2010 and October 2015 predominantly once per quarter. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected in accordance with the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 32229 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of 2 samples exceeded the Secondary MCLs. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The SMCL for chloride is 250 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR title 22 section 64449. | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station: 630EWK001-East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 8/14/2007 11/8/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5040 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chloride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled chloride under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2002 and 2005. Chloride concentrations in 16 samples ranged from 0.58 to 5.35 mg/L. The MCL was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for chloride is 250 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sixteen quarterly samples (2 to 4 samples per year) were collected between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70308 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Copper |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, three that assess for MUN and two that assess for COLD. Zero of six samples exceed the MUN guideline and zero of five samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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. Zero of six samples exceed the MUN guideline and zero of five samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99074 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-08-07 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 130044 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for total Copper incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 1.0 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-08-07 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5076 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled copper under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Total recoverable copper concentrations in 4 samples ranged from 1.0. to 1.4 ug/L. The MCLs were not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) are applicable under the Lahontan Basin Plan's Chemical Constituents objective. The primary MCL for copper is 1300 ug/L and the secondary MCL is 1000 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 130092 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Copper. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level for total Copper incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 1.0 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-08-07 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5069 | ||||
Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled copper under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Dissolved copper concentrations in 4 samples ranged from 0.7 to 1.6 ug/L. The CTR standards were not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) freshwater aquatic life standards for copper are hardness-dependent, At the hardness levels reported for this station, the acute (1 hour average) standard ranges from 8.00 to 9.31 ug/L The chronic (4 day average) standard ranges from 5.60 to 6.42 ug/L. | ||||
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: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
103816 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) |
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 Staff 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 that assess the same single tissue sample for COMM and COLD. Zero of one samples exceed the COLD guideline and zero of one samples exceed the COMM guideline for Total DDT. 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. Zero of one samples exceed the COLD guideline and zero of one samples exceed the COMM 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99339 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD). Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in fish tissue is 15 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99338 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD). Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total DDT concentration of 1000 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102637 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin |
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 Staff 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 that are both based on the same single fish tissue sample assessed for COLD and COMM. Zero of one tissue samples exceed the COLD guideline and one of one samples exceed the COMM guideline for dieldrin. 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. Zero of one tissue samples exceed the COLD guideline and one of one samples exceed the COMM guideline for dieldrin 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99101 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Dieldrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). Of these, 1 species (Sacramento Blackfish) exceeded the water quality standard. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in fish tissue is 0.32 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99099 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dieldrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Dieldrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Dieldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102638 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan |
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 Staff 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 both based on the same single tissue sample assessed for COLD and COMM. The single tissue sample does not exceed the guideline for either COLD or COMM. 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. Zero of one samples exceeded the tissue guideline for COLD or for COMM 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99153 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Endosulfan. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in fish tissue is 13,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99154 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endosulfan | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Endosulfan. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endosulfan, Total concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102639 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Endrin |
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 Staff 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 that are both based on the same single fish tissue sample. The single tissue samples does not exceed the guideline for either COLD or COMM for endrin. 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. Zero of one samples exceeded the tissue 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99123 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Endrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99125 | ||||
Pollutant: | Endrin | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Endrin. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; USEPA, 2000) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
78389 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Fluoride |
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 | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 26 samples exceed the guideline for fluoride. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 26 samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 32237 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of 2 samples exceed the MCL for Flouride. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for Fluoride is 2.0 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Maximum Contaminant Levels for organic and inorganic chemicals. CCR | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station: 630EWK001-East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 8/14/2007 11/8/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 97231 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 20 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Fluoride. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Fluoride incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 2 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-10-22 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99002 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fluoride | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Fluoride. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Fluoride incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 2 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
DECISION ID |
102640 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor |
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 Staff 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.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the one tissue samples exceed the tissue guideline for heptachlor. 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. Zero of one 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99202 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Heptachlor. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102641 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide |
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 Staff 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 that are both based on the same single fish tissue sample assessed for COLD and COMM. Zero of one samples exceed the COLD 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. Zero of one 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99461 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Heptachlor Epoxide. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor Epoxide concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99459 | ||||
Pollutant: | Heptachlor epoxide | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Waterboard staff assessed SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: Zero of Zero samples exceeded the water quality standard for Heptachlor Epoxide. Although data was collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite), all 1 sample(s) had to be thrown out due to quantitation issues. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in fish tissue is 0.93 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1999) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102642 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB |
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 Staff 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.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one fish tissue 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. Zero of one 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99431 | ||||
Pollutant: | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Hexachlorobenzene. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in fish tissue is 2.8 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
70843 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Nine lines of evidence, two which assess E. coli data for the REC-1 beneficial use, four which assess fecal coliform data for the MUN beneficial use and three which assess fecal coliform data for the now superseded REC-1 beneficial use are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 30 E. coli STV samples exceed the water quality objective; 4 of 36 fecal coliform geomean samples exceed the objective; Other available lines of evidence indicate that the objectives are not being exceeded with a frequency which warrants addition of the waterbody to the list of impaired waters. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 30 E. coli STV samples exceed the water quality objective; 4 of 36 fecal coliform geomean samples exceed the objective; Other available lines of evidence indicate that the objectives are not being exceeded with a frequency which warrants addition of the waterbody to the list of impaired waters, and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96927 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Statistical Threshold Value | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 30 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by Lahontan staff for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) RWB6 Monitoring program, and for a supplemental TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. The TMDL Special Study was developed by Lahontan Planning and SWAMP staff to provide additional data to the quarterly SWAMP monitoring. The purpose was to gain a better temporal understanding of levels of specific pollutants in the waterbody. To ensure the two datasets could be viably analyzed as one, the TMDL Special Study followed the same sampling protocol as SWAMP. Accordingly, the two datasets have been combined for this assessment to reflect the intended design and to best characterize conditions in the watershed. Water Board staff determined beneficial use support, and the results are as follows: 0 of the 30 samples exceeded exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality standard for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all waters, except Lake Tahoe, where the salinity is less than 10 parts per thousand (ppth) 95 percent or more of the time is a STATISTICAL THRESHOLD VALUE (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL not to be exceeded more than 10 percent of the time (calculated monthly). | ||||
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, station: 630EWK001 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2011-06-13 and 2016-22-12 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96944 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | GeoMean | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 36 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by Lahontan staff for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) RWB6 Monitoring program, and for a supplemental TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. The TMDL Special Study was developed by Lahontan Planning and SWAMP staff to provide additional data to the quarterly SWAMP monitoring. The purpose was to gain a better temporal understanding of levels of specific pollutants in the waterbody. To ensure the two datasets could be viably analyzed as one, the TMDL Special Study followed the same sampling protocol as SWAMP. Accordingly, the two datasets have been combined for this assessment to reflect the intended design and to best characterize conditions in the watershed. 36 geomeans could be computed from the raw data, 4 of which exceeded the water quality objective of 20CFU/100mL. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's objective for coliform bacteria states: "Waters shall not contain concentrations of coliform organisms attributable to anthropogenic sources, including human and livestock wastes. The fecal coliform concentration during any 30-day period shall not exceed a log mean of 20/100 ml, nor shall more than 10 percent of all samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 40/100 ml. The log mean shall ideally be based on a minimum of not less than five samples collected as evenly spaced as practicable during any 30-day period. However, a log mean concentration exceeding 20/100 ml for any 30-day period shall indicate violation of this objective even if fewer than five samples were collected." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one site, stations: 630EWK001 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between days 2010-13-9 and 2016-22-12 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected in accordance with the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5694 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Water column surveys (e.g. fecal coliform) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled fecal coliform bacteria under the Region 6 SWAMP between 2003 and 2005. Bacteria counts in five of six samples were estimated values, and the count in one sample was below the detection level. The objective was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's water quality objective for coliform bacteria states: "Waters shall not contain concentrations of coliform organisms attributable to anthropogenic sources, including human and livestock waste.
The fecal coliform concentration during any 30-day period shall not exceed a log mean of 20/100 ml, nor shall more than 10 percent of all samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 40/100 ml. The log mean shall ideally be based on a minimum of not less than five samples collected a evenly spaced as practicable during any 30-day period. However, a log mean concentration exceeding 20/100 ml for any 30-day period shall indicate violation of this objective even if fewer than five samples were collected." |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Six quarterly samples were collected at approximately quarterly intervals between November 2003 and August 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 129198 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB6_BACT_Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 2 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Coliform, Fecal. The water quality standard is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for Regional Water Board 6 Bacteria Monitoring. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of coliform organisms attributable to anthropogenic sources, including human and livestock wastes. The fecal coliform concentration during any 30-day period shall not exceed a log mean of 20/100 ml, nor shall more than 10 percent of all samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 40/100 ml. (Lahontan Region Basin Plan) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 630EWK001 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2015-08-19 and 2016-09-28 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 129279 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB6_BACT_Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 2 samples exceeded the logmean water quality standard for Coliform, Fecal. This is a 30-day rolling logmean that is calculated daily. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for Regional Water Board 6 Bacteria Monitoring. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Waters shall not contain concentrations of coliform organisms attributable to anthropogenic sources, including human and livestock wastes. The fecal coliform concentration during any 30-day period shall not exceed a log mean of 20/100 ml. (Lahontan Region Basin Plan) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s), station(s): 630EWK001 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2015-08-19 and 2016-09-28 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 32253 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the five samples exceeded the Fecal Coliform objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed more than 40/100 ml. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from station 630EWK001 East Walker River, at CA/NV state line. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a month from August to December 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5695 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Water column surveys (e.g. fecal coliform) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled fecal coliform bacteria under the Region 6 SWAMP program between 2003 and 2005. Bacteria counts in five of six samples were estimated values, and the count in one sample was below the detection level. The objective was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's objective for coliform bacteria states: "Waters shall not contain concentrations of coliform organisms attributable to anthropogenic sources, including human and livestock waste.
The fecal coliform concentration during any 30-day period shall not exceed a log mean of 20/100 ml, nor shall more than 10 percent of all samples collected during any 30-day period exceed 40/100 ml. The log mean shall ideally be based on a minimum of not less than five samples collected a evenly spaced as practicable during any 30-day period. However, a log mean concentration exceeding 20/100 ml for any 30-day period shall indicate violation of this objective even if fewer than five samples were collected." |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Six samples were collected approximately quarterly between November 2003 and August 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 34859 | ||||
Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the five samples exceeded the fecal coliform objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The fecal coliform concentration during any 30-day period shall not exceed a log mean of 20/100 ml. Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from station 630EWK001 East Walker River, at CA/NV state line. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected once a month from August to December 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99702 | ||||
Pollutant: | Escherichia coli (E. coli) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed RWB6_BACT_Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 2 samples exceeded the Statistical Threshold Value (STV) water quality standard for E. coli. The STV is based on a 10% exceedance rate that is calculated monthly. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for Regional Water Board 6 Bacteria Monitoring. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The bacteria water quality objective applicable to all waters, except Lake Tahoe, where the salinity is less than 10 parts per thousand (ppth) 95 percent or more of the time is a STATISTICAL THRESHOLD VALUE (STV) of 320 cfu/100 mL not to be exceeded more than 10 percent of the time (calculated monthly). | ||||
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): 630EWK001 | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the days of 2015-08-19 and 2016-09-28 . | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
69938 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Iron |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Eight lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, four that assess for MUN and four that assess for COLD. Zero of 14 samples exceed the COLD guideline and one of 14 samples exceed the MUN guideline for iron. 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. Zero of 14 samples exceed the COLD guideline and one of 14 samples exceed the MUN 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5081 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled iron under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Total recoverable iron concentrations in 4 samples ranged from 210 to 260 ug/L. The MCL was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The secondary MCL for iron is 300 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98711 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Iron. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Red Book states that based on field observations principally, a criterion of 1.0 mg/L iron for freshwater aquatic life is believed to be adequately protective. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-10-22 and 2011-07-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7710 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled iron under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Dissolved iron concentrations in two of four samples were estimated values. Dissolved iron concentrations in the remaining samples were samples 29 and 71 ug/L. The criterion was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's national freshwater aquatic life criterion for iron is a 4-day average of 1000 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99006 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Iron. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region¦s Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). This is based upon drinking water standards specified in the following provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations which are incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals), Table 64431-B of Section 64431 (Fluoride), Table 64444-A of Section 64444 (Organic Chemicals), Table 64449-A of Section 64449 (Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels-Ranges). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Iron is 0.3 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 44287 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Iron. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region's Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). This is based upon drinking water standards specified in the following provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations which are incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals), Table 64431-B of Section 64431 (Fluoride), Table 64444-A of Section 64444 (Organic Chemicals), Table 64449-A of Section 64449 (Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels-Ranges). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Iron is 0.3 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir was collected at 1 monitoring site [ East Walker River, at CA/NV state line] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/14/2007-11/8/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99004 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Iron. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Red Book states that based on field observations principally, a criterion of 1.0 mg/L iron for freshwater aquatic life is believed to be adequately protective. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 44286 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Iron. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Red Book states that based on field observations principally, a criterion of 1.0 mg/L iron for freshwater aquatic life is believed to be adequately protective (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 East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir was collected at 1 monitoring site [ East Walker River, at CA/NV state line] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/14/2007-11/8/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98557 | ||||
Pollutant: | Iron | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Iron. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region?s Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). This is based upon drinking water standards specified in the following provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations which are incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals), Table 64431-B of Section 64431 (Fluoride), Table 64444-A of Section 64444 (Organic Chemicals), Table 64449-A of Section 64449 (Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels-Ranges). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Iron is 0.3 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-10-22 and 2011-07-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
102643 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
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: | New Decision |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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 that are both based on the same single fish tissue sample assessed for COLD and COMM. The single sample does not exceed the guideline for either COLD or COMM. 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. Zero of one samples exceeded the guideline for both COLD and COMM 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99386 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for HCH, gamma-. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Lindane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99385 | ||||
Pollutant: | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for HCH, gamma-. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for lindane in fish tissue is 4.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 2005) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
69876 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Mercury |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two that assess for mercury in water and two that assess fish tissue. One of one fish tissues samples exceed the COMM tissue objective for mercury, one of one samples exceed the WILD tissue objective, zero of four samples exceed the COLD criteria for mercury in water and zero of four samples exceed the MUN mercury in water criteria. The exceedances in the fish tissue data indicate this waterbody is likely impaired for mercury, however more data is needed to confirm this. 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. One of one fish tissues samples exceed the COMM tissue objective for mercury, one of one samples exceed the WILD tissue objective, zero of four samples exceed the COLD criteria for mercury in water and zero of four samples exceed the MUN 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. Since the single sample did exceed the mercury tissue objective, this indicates mercury impairment is probable for this water body. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 133156 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Wildlife 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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 3 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 7 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 2 fish species (1 composite(s) of Rainbow Trout each composed of 1 fish per composite, 6 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 1 fish per composite). Of these annual averages, 1 average(s), (Year(s): 2011) exceeded the objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of Wildlife Habitat comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. If trophic level 3 fish are used in the assessment then the Prey Fish Water Quality Objective must also be used to determine that the Sport Fish Objective is being met. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-09-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 133071 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 1 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 3 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 7 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 2 fish species (1 composite(s) of Rainbow Trout each composed of 1 fish per composite, 6 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 1 fish per composite). Of these annual averages, 1 average(s), (Year(s): 2011) exceeded the objective. This LOE does not contain data from fish whos average length was outside of the legal size limits as described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishing Regulations. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing beneficial comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027. | ||||
Guideline 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 | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-09-06 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5764 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled mercury quarterly in the East Walker River under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Three of four total mercury samples were below the detection level, and one was 0.01 ug/L The criteria were not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) freshwater aquatic life criteria (expressed as total mercury) are a 4- day average of 0.77 ug/L and a 1-hour maximum of 1.4 ug/L | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5082 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled mercury under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Mercury concentrations in four samples ranged from less than 0.01 ug/L to 0.01 ug/L. The MCL was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL tor inorganic mercury is 2 ug/L.
The California Toxics Rule water and fish consumption standard for mercury is 0.050 ug/L. |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
102644 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Microcystins |
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 Staff 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.
Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that are all based on the same single tissue sample analyzed for different forms of microcystin. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for all four of the forms of microcystin analyzed. 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. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for all four of the forms of microcystin 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99251 | ||||
Pollutant: | Microcystins | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Microcystins. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The 10 ng/g wet weight action level for microcystins for edible sport fish and shellfish containing microcystins identifies the maximum concentration of cyanotoxins that a typical consumer (one meal per week) could ingest without exceeding the reference dose, and is equal to the sum of the Microcystin congeners LA, LR, RR, and LY.(OEHHA 2012) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99244 | ||||
Pollutant: | Microcystin-YR | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Microcystin-YR. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The 10 ng/g wet weight action level for microcystins for edible sport fish and shellfish containing Microcystin-YR identifies the maximum concentration of cyanotoxins that a typical consumer (one meal per week) could ingest without exceeding the reference dose.(OEHHA 2012) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99489 | ||||
Pollutant: | Microcystin-RR | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Microcystin-RR. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The 10 ng/g wet weight action level for microcystins for edible sport fish and shellfish containing Microcystin-RR identifies the maximum concentration of cyanotoxins that a typical consumer (one meal per week) could ingest without exceeding the reference dose.(OEHHA 2012) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99483 | ||||
Pollutant: | Microcystin-LR | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Microcystin-LR. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The 10 ng/g wet weight action level for microcystins for edible sport fish and shellfish containing Microcystin-LR identifies the maximum concentration of cyanotoxins that a typical consumer (one meal per week) could ingest without exceeding the reference dose.(OEHHA 2012) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99477 | ||||
Pollutant: | Microcystin-LA | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Microcystin-LA. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The 10 ng/g wet weight action level for microcystins for edible sport fish and shellfish containing Microcystin-LA identifies the maximum concentration of cyanotoxins that a typical consumer (one meal per week) could ingest without exceeding the reference dose.(OEHHA 2012) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
103815 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Mirex |
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 Staff 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.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that consists of a single tissue sample however it could not be assessed due to quantitation issues. Zero of zero samples exceed the guideline for mirex. 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.Zero of zero 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99269 | ||||
Pollutant: | Mirex | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Waterboard staff assessed SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: Zero of Zero samples exceeded the water quality standard for Mirex. Although data was collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite), all 1 sample(s) had to be thrown out due to quantitation issues. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in fish tissue is 0.28 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008; OEHHA, 1992) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens. | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
73024 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 48 samples exceed the guideline for nitrate/nitrite as N. 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. Zero of 48 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 97080 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-01-06 and 2011-08-01 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 44326 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrate/Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir was collected at 1 monitoring site [ East Walker River, at CA/NV state line] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/14/2007-11/8/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5034 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled this station under the Region 6 SWAMP program between 2001 and 2005. Concentrations of nitrite plus nitrate in 16 quarterly samples ranged from below detection level to 0.42 mg/L. One sample was an estimated value. The MCL was not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for nitrite plus nitrate is 10 mg/L expressed "as nitrogen." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sixteen quarterly samples were collected between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. Boron in this watershed is from natural sources. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98545 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2010-11-01 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 97250 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 16 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-04-05 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99048 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrate + Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
DECISION ID |
75810 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the six samples exceed the guideline for nitrite. 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. Zero of six 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99051 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Basin, Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Table 64431-A of section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for Nitrite as N is 1.0 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-12-08 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 97141 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen, Nitrite | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Basin, Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Table 64431-A of section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for Nitrite as N is 1.0 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2010-09-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7747 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrite as Nitrite NO2 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey collected one NO2-N sample under the Region 6 SWAMP program on 6/28/2002. The nitrite concentration was 0.011 mg/L. The MCL was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for nitrite is 1 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected on 6/28/2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 44346 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrite as Nitrite NO2 | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Nitrite as N. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Basin, Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Table 64431-A of section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for Nitrite as N is 1.0 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir was collected at 1 monitoring site [ East Walker River, at CA/NV state line] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/14/2007-11/8/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
71641 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Selenium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two based on the same water samples assessed for COLD and MUN and one based on a single fish tissue sample assessed for COMM. Zero of four water samples exceed the criteria for COLD and MUN and zero of one samples exceed the tissue guideline for COMM for selenium. 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.Zero of four water samples exceed the criteria for COLD and MUN and zero of one samples exceed the tissue 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7713 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled selenium under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Concentrations of total selenium in 3 of 4 samples were estimated values, and the fourth sample was below the detection level. The MCL was not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for selenium is 50 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99285 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Tissue | ||||
Matrix: | Tissue | ||||
Fraction: | Fish fillet | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms | ||||
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 SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Selenium. Data were collected for 1 fish species (1 composite(s) of Sacramento Blackfish each composed of 5 fish per composite). | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for SWAMP Sportfish Rivers and Streams. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | The OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for selenium in fish tissue is 7.4 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A background dietary consumption rate of 0.114 mg/day is applied for this micronutrient. (Klasing, S., and R. Brodberg, 2008) | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 630EWK002. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2011-08-29 and 2011-08-29 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5123 | ||||
Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled selenium under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Dissolved selenium concentrations in 3 of 4 samples were below the detection level. The concentration in the remaining sample was an estimated value. The CTR standards were not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) standards for protection of freshwater aquatic life are as follows: 4 day average = 5.0 ug/L; 1-hour average = 20 ug/L. | ||||
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: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
102607 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
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 Staff 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.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two that assess for MUN and two that assess for AGR. Three of 23 samples exceed the MUN guideline and zero of 23 samples exceed the AGR guideline for sodium. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of 23 samples exceed the MUN guideline and zero of 23 samples exceed the AGR guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99028 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
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 (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Per the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (USEPA 2012), the health advisory for sodium for individuals on a sodium-restricted diet is 20 mg/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98591 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 19 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Per the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (USEPA 2012), the health advisory for sodium for individuals on a sodium-restricted diet is 20 mg/l. | ||||
Guideline Reference: | 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-10-22 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99027 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
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 (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
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(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98489 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 19 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 19 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sodium. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
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(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-10-22 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
104539 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) |
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 Staff 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. 0 of 6 samples exceed the water quality objective. The one exceeding data point calculated during the previous assessment cycle may have been calculated incorrectly. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 6 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 are 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 133527 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Agricultural Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by the Region 6 SWAMP program between 2010 and 2015. Annual average SAR ratios ranged from 0.51 to 0.93. No SAR annual average exceeded the objective of 2. 2 samples of each analyte were thrown out in 2011 because of hold time violations. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The objective for Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) in the East Walker River (below Bridgeport Reservoir), as stipulated in the Lahontan Basin Plan 3-11, is a ratio not to exceed 2. SAR is calculated as Na/Sqrt((Ca+Mg)/2 in annual average fashion, and the formula uses milliequivalent (mEq) concentrations of each ion. To calculate mEq, the formula is (ion mg/L / molar mass)*valence. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one station, 631EWK001, located at the CA/NV stateline. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected once in 2010 and 2011, and in quarterly fashion from 2012 to 2015. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected in accordance with the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
70490 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of 49 samples exceed the guideline for specific conductance. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 49 samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 97268 | ||||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 26 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 26 samples exceeded the water quality standard for SpecificConductivity. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Water designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL) based upon drinking water standards specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's \Chemical Constituents\" objective. The California Secondary MCL for specific conductivity is 900 uS/cm." | ||||
Guideline Reference: | California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring | ||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5050 | ||||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductance | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured specific conductance under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2005. Fourteen field measurements of specific conductance ranged from 144 to 271 uS/cm. An additional 6 laboratory measurements were taken for samples collected on the same dates as field measurements. Laboratory specific conductance ranged from 151 to 202 uS/cm. The MCL was not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for specific conductance is 900 microsiemens per centimeter (uS/cm). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Fourteen quarterly field measurements and 6 laboratory measurements of specific conductance were taken between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 44383 | ||||
Pollutant: | Specific Conductivity | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 9 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 9 samples exceed the criterion for Conductivity(Us). | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for specific conductance is 900 uS/cm (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir was collected at 1 monitoring site [ East Walker River, at CA/NV state line] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/14/2007-12/26/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
70840 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Sulfates |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 35 samples exceed the guideline for sulfate. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 35 samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 98594 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 20 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 20 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sulfate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for Sulfate 250 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-10-22 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99030 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sulfate. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for Sulfate 250 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 32235 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of 2 samples exceeded the Secondary MCLs objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The SMCL for Sulfates (SO4) is 250 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels and Compliance. CCR title 22 section 64449. | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station: 630EWK001-East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on the following dates: 8/14/2007, 11/8/2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5052 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sulfates | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled sulfate under the Region 6 SWAMP program between 2003 and 2005. Sulfate concentrations in 7 samples ranged from 5.1 to 23 mg/L. The MCL was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for sulfate is 250 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Seven samples were collected approximately quarterly between November 2003 and August 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70679 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, one that assesses for MUN and three that assess for the site specific objective for COLD. Zero of 15 samples exceed the MUN guideline and four of 15 samples exceed the site specific objective for total dissolved solids. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of 15 samples exceed the MUN guideline and four of 15 samples exceed the site specific objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96867 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by Lahontan staff for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) RWB6 Monitoring program, and for a supplemental TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. The TMDL Special Study was developed by Lahontan Planning and SWAMP staff to provide additional data to the quarterly SWAMP monitoring. The purpose was to gain a better temporal understanding of levels of specific pollutants in the waterbody. To ensure the two datasets could be viably analyzed as one, the TMDL Special Study followed the same sampling protocol as SWAMP. Accordingly, the two datasets have been combined for this assessment to reflect the intended design and to best characterize conditions in the watershed. Data for the projects were collected between September 2010 and December 2016 from one monitoring location. TDS concentrations ranged from 65 to 233 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the TMDL Integrated Report Special Study. | |||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in the East Walker River, as referenced by the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15 and incorporated because of the tributary rule to reflect the interstate nature of the waterbody, is an annual average not to exceed 145 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one monitoring location, 630EWK001, which is located just upstream of the CA/NV stateline. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between September 2010 and December 2016 with predominately a twice-per-quarter frequency. More visits were made to the site in the warmer months compared with winter months. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed's role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5054 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled TDS under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2005. TDS concentrations in 15 samples analyzed as "residue" ranged from 90 to 186 mg/L. One of two additional samples analyzed as "nonfilterable" had a TDS concentration below detection level; the other sample had a concentration of 11 mg/L. The MCL was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient surface waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) is 500 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Fifteen TDS samples analyzed as "residue" were collected quarterly between 2001 and 2005. Two additional samples analyzed as "nonfilterable" were collected in 2003 and 2004.. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5053 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled TDS under the Region 6 SWAMP program at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2005. Two different laboratory methods were used. TDS concentrations in 15 individual samples analyzed as "residue" ranged from 90 to 186 mg/L. Of two additional samples analyzed as "nonfilterable" , one was below detection level and the other was 11 mg/L. (The "residue" TDS concentration on the same date was 121 mg/L.) There were no violations of the annual average objective in five years of sampling. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site-specific objective for Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) includes an annual average of 45 mg/L and a 90th percentile value of 160 mg/L (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-15). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Fifteen TDS samples analyzed as "residue" were collected between 2001 and 2005. Two additional samples collected in 2003 and 2004 were analyzed as "nonfilterable." | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96961 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Dissolved Solids | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection at one site on the East Fork Walker River at the state line (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) between 2011 and 2013. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 89 to 165 mg/L. Three annual averages were computed and one of them exceeded the water quality objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for total nitrogen in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 145 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters upstream of Bridgeport Reservoir, it is being used to assess the waters downstream of the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection from one location (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) located near the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between March 2011 and October 2013 on an irregular basis. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | These are data from the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database that do not require a QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
DECISION ID |
76597 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) |
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 | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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, one which evaluates Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen (DKN) data and one which evaluates Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) data are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 2 DKN samples and 0 of 16 TKN samples exceed the water quality objectives. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 16 TKN samples exceed the objectives and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7749 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey collected 16 quarterly samples under the Region 6 SWAMP program between 2001 and 2005. Concentrations of total Kjeldahl nitrogen ranged from 0.37 to 3.1 mg/L. No associated data on algae or macrophytes were available for assessment of compliance with the objective for biostimulatory substances. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There is no site-specific objective for total Kjeldahl nitrogen. The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative objective for biostimulatory substances states: "Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sixteen quarterly samples were collected between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7748 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved Kjeldahl Nitrogen | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey collected two samples under the Region 6 SWAMP program in August and November 2003. Concentrations of dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen were 0.9 and 0.38 mg/L. No associated data on algae or macrophytes were available for assessment of compliance with the objective for biostimulatory substances. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There are no site-specific objectives for dissolved Kjeldahl nitrogen. The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative objective for biostimulatory substances states: "Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Two samples were collected in August and November 2003. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70252 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Zinc |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that are based on two data sets each assessed for MUN and COLD. Zero of five samples exceed the guideline for MUN and zero of five samples exceed the criteria for COLD. 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. Zero of five samples exceed the guideline for MUN and zero of five samples exceed the criteria for COLD 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5126 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled zinc under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Four total zinc samples had concentrations ranging from below the detection level to 2 ug/L. The MCL was not violated. . | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for zinc is 5000 ug/L.
The California Toxics Rule water and fish consumption standard (for waters designated MUN) is 1.7 ug/L |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99053 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold 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 STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | 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(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-08-07 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99054 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
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 STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Zinc. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). This is based upon drinking water standards specified in the following provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations which are incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals), Table 64431-B of Section 64431 (Fluoride), Table 64444-A of Section 64444 (Organic Chemicals), Table 64449-A of Section 64449 (Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels-Ranges). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Zinc is 5 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-08-07 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5125 | ||||
Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled zinc quarterly under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Dissolved zinc concentrations in three of four samples were below the detection level and the fourth sample was 2 ug/L. The CTR standards were not violated. . | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) freshwater aquatic life standards for zinc are dependent on hardness. At the hardness levels reported for this station, the acute (1-hour average) standard ranges from 73.53 to 84.23 ug/L and the chronic (4-day average) standard ranges from 74.13 to 84.92ug/L.) | ||||
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: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
79525 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | pH |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, four that assess for COLD and two that assess for MUN.The Basin Plan pH objective requires background data that is unavailable, consequently the pH data cannot be assessed. All the lines of evidence show zero of zero samples exceed the objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of zero samples exceeded the objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
Regional Board Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 129861 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality standard for pH. Although pH data does exist for this waterbody, the objective for this pollutant requires background information that is currently unavailable, and therefore an assessment of water quality standards could not be made. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide objective for pH states: \In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units. The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis.\"" | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 129743 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality standard for pH. Although pH data does exist for this waterbody, the objective for this pollutant requires background information that is currently unavailable, and therefore an assessment of water quality standards could not be made. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide objective for pH states: \In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units. The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis.\"" | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 129853 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality standard for pH. Although pH data does exist for this waterbody, the objective for this pollutant requires background information that is currently unavailable, and therefore an assessment of water quality standards could not be made. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide objective for pH states: \In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units. The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis.\"" | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 33342 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | There were 5 samples with pH ranging from 7.7 to 9.5. The normal ambient pH level for this water body is unknown and so it is unknown whether any exceedences occurred. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The applicable objective states: "In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units." (Lahontan Basin Plan). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station: 630EWK001 (East Walker River, at CA/NV state line). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between August and December 2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5043 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled pH under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2002 and 2005. Fifteen field measurements had pH values ranging from 7.8 to 9.7 units. Three measurements exceeded 8.5 units. Five laboratory pH measurements ranged from 7.4 to 8.5 units. However, the 6.5 to 8.5 unit limit does not apply to waters designated for the COLD use. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative objectives for pH states: "In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units.
The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis." |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Fifteen field measurements of pH were taken quarterly between 2001 and 2005. Five laboratory measurements were taken in samples collected on the same dates as the corresponding field measurements. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 129694 | ||||
Pollutant: | pH | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality standard for pH. Although pH data does exist for this waterbody, the objective for this pollutant requires background information that is currently unavailable, and therefore an assessment of water quality standards could not be made. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide objective for pH states: \In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units. The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis.\"" | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2015-10-15 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
70607 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Arsenic |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2031 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, three that assess COLD and three that assess MUN. Zero of twelve samples exceed the guideline for COLD and three of twelve samples exceed the guideline for MUN. 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. Zero of twelve samples exceed the guideline for COLD and three of twelve samples exceed the guideline for MUN 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99067 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 150 ug/L. The maximum concentration (1-hr average) is 340 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). This data was compared to the more protective, 4-Day average of 150 ug/L. | ||||
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(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5030 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled arsenic under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Dissolved arsenic concentrations in four samples ranged from 2 to 18 ug/L. The CTR standards were not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) standards for protection of freshwater aquatic life are as follows:
4-day average = 150 ug/L 1- hour average = 340 ug/L |
||||
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: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. Arsenic in this watershed is from natural sources. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99026 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for arsenic incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 0.010 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5031 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled arsenic under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Concentrations of total arsenic in four samples ranged from 3 to 18 ug/L. One sample exceeded the California MCL. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for arsenic is 10 ug/L (effective November 28, 2008). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. Arsenic in this watershed is from natural sources. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99079 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved arsenic criterion continuous concentration (expressed as a 4-day average) to protect aquatic life in freshwater for dissolved arsenic is 150 ug/L. The maximum concentration (1-hr average) is 340 ug/L (California Toxics Rule, 2000). This data was compared to the more protective, 4-Day average of 150 ug/L. | ||||
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(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 99037 | ||||
Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 4 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Arsenic. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Maximum Contaminant Level for arsenic incorporated by reference in the Basin Plan is 0.010 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region). | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
DECISION ID |
76723 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2031 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two of which (one line of evidence from 2010 and 2012) do not assess the data against any water quality objective for nitrogen and are not included in the sample and exceedance count that follows. Eight of the ten samples exceed the objective for total nitrogen. 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. Eight of ten 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 27682 | ||||
Pollutant: | Nitrogen | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Nine samples collected by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2000 and 2001 had a mean concentration of 0.64 mg/L, exceeding the objective. The range of concentrations was 0.109 to 1.32 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Administrative Record of Lahontan RWQCB's 2001-2002 Section 303(d) List Update Process Resolution R6T-2002-0002 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site-specific objective for Total Nitrogen includes an annual average of 0.50 mg/L and a 90th percentile value of 0.80 mg/L (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-15). (Note: this objective was used in the original listing. However, it applies to the East Walker River above Bridgeport Reservoir. There is no California numeric objective for nitrogen in the river below the reservoir.) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the USGS gaging station below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Nine samples were collected approximately monthly in 2000 and 2001. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | The data were collected and analyzed under USGS quality assurance protocols. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96895 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected as part of regional routine SWAMP monitoring. Data were collected from one site between 2010 and 2015. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 0.231 to 1.22 mg/L. Six annual averages were computed, four of which exceeded the water quality objective in 2010, 2012, 2013 and 2015. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for total nitrogen in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 0.5 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters above Bridgeport Reservoir it has been used to assess the waters below the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one location, 630EWK001, which is located just upstream of the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between October 2010 and October 2015 predominantly once per quarter. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected in accordance with the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5036 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled this segment under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2005. Calculated concentrations of total nitrogen in 16 samples ranged from 0.386 to 3.463 mg/L. No biologiical data were collected for assessment of compliance with the objective for biostimulatory substances. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There is no site-specific numerical objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan for Total Nitrogen for this segment. The regionwide narrative objective for biostimulatory substances states:
"Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses." |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sixteen quarterly samples (two to four samples per year) were collected between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96960 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection at one site on the East Fork Walker River at the state line (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) between 2011 and 2013. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 0.4 to 1.1 mg/L. Three annual averages were computed and all of them exceeded the water quality objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for total nitrogen in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 0.50 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters upstream of Bridgeport Reservoir, it is being used to assess the waters downstream of the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection from one location (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) located near the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between March 2011 and October 2013 on an irregular basis. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | These are data from the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database that do not require a QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 34531 | ||||
Pollutant: | Total Nitrogen as N | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The two samples collected could not be compared to a water quality objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There is no site-specific numerical objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan for Total Nitrogen for this segment. The regionwide narrative objective for biostimulatory substances states: "Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses." | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at East Walker River, at CA/NV state line (630EWK001). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on August and November 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
DECISION ID |
71480 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
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)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2031 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Seven lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, five that assess for dissolved oxygen concentration and two that assesses for dissolved oxygen saturation. 10 of 56 samples exceed the objective for dissolved oxygen concentration and 3 of 11 samples exceed the dissolved oxygen saturation 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. 10 of 56 samples exceed the objective for dissolved oxygen 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5815 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured percent saturation of dissolved oxygen quarterly between November 2003 and August 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Percent saturation in 6 measurements ranged from 88 to 119 percent. The objective was not violated. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative objective states that percent saturation shall not be depressed by more than 10 percent and minimum dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 80 percent saturation. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, the East Walker River near state line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Six quarterly measurements were taken between November 2003 and August 2006. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5731 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Aquatic Life Use: | Fish Spawning | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey measured dissolved oxygen quarterly between 2001 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Dissolved oxygen concentrations in 15 samples ranged from 7.1 to 12 mg/L. Four of 15 samples were below the 8 mg/L minimum concentration. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters designated for the COLD and SPWN beneficial uses the 1- day minimum objective is 8 mg/L (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-6) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, the East Walker River near state line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Fifteen quarterly samples were collected between August 2002 and August 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 130033 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed STORET data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 6 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters with the beneficial uses of COLD, COLD with SPWN, WARM, and WARM with SPWN, the minimum dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than that specified in Table 3-6. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2011-03-09 and 2012-08-07 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | QAPP not required for federal data | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 32270 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One sample was below the 1 day minimum. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The objective from Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-6 with both cold and spawn beneficial uses shall not be less than a one-day minimum dissolved oxygen concentration of 8 mg/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected at the following station: 630EWK001-East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected between August and December 2007 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 130019 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 15 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Oxygen, Dissolved. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | For waters with the beneficial uses of COLD, COLD with SPWN, WARM, and WARM with SPWN, the minimum dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than that specified in Table 3-6. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region) | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2013-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 44403 | ||||
Pollutant: | Dissolved oxygen saturation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 5 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 3 of 5 samples exceed the criterion for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region's water quality objective states that the dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 80 percent of saturation. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir was collected at 1 monitoring site [ East Walker River, at CA/NV state line] | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 8/14/2007-12/26/2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 130101 | ||||
Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 5 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 5 of 15 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Oxygen, Saturation. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region's water quality objective states that the dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than 80 percent of saturation. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (630EWK001) | ||||
Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-13 and 2013-06-13 | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
76342 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus |
Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Revised |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2031 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff 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.
Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, one of which (#5049 ) does not assess the data against any water quality objective for phosphorus. The remaining lines of evidence assess the data against the Basin Plan site specific objective for the E. Walker River upstream of Bridgeport Reservoir, which is objective used for the 2018 lines of evidence. The samples from #5049 are not included in the following sample exceedance count. Five of eleven samples exceed the objective for phosphorus. 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. Five of eleven 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 Staff 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. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5049 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled the East Walker River under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2005. Concentrations of total P in 15 samples ranged from 0.036 to 0.37 mg/L. No biological data are available for assessment of compliance with the objective for biostimulatory substances. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There are no site specific numerical objectives for phosphorus for this segment. The regionwide narrative objective for biostimulatory substances states:
"Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in concentrations that promote aquatic growths to the extent that such growths cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses." |
||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Fifteen quarterly samples were taken between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96959 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 3 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 3 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection at one site on the East Fork Walker River at the state line (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) between 2011 and 2013. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 0.03 to 0.26 mg/L. Three annual averages were computed and all of them exceeded the water quality objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle. | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for total phosphorous in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 0.06 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters upstream of Bridgeport Reservoir, it is being used to assess the waters downstream of the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected by the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection from one location (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-EF-001) located near the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between March 2011 and October 2013 on an irregular basis. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | These are data from the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database that do not require a QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | This is a placeholder reference for data which does not require a QAPP. | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 27683 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey collected monthly samples at the gaging station below Bridgeport Reservoir between April 2000 and February 2001. The mean concentrations of these 11 samples was 0.083 mg/L. The mean annual cocentration in nine USGS samples for 2000 was 0.094 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | Administrative Record of Lahontan RWQCB's 2001-2002 Section 303(d) List Update Process Resolution R6T-2002-0002 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site-specific water quality objective used in the 2002 listing of the East Walker River included an annual mean total phosphorus concentration of 0.06 mg/L and a 90th percentile value of 0.10 mg/L. This objective actually applies to a station upstream of Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at the USGS gaging station below Bridgeport Reservoir. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Eleven samples were collected monthly between April 2000 and February 2001. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Sampling and analysis were done according to the SWAMP QAPP. However, in July 2009 an error was discovered in the QAPP related to holding times for total phosphorus samples that affects the validity of data for the Lahontan Region The holding time for samples that are not acid-preserved.should be 48 hours rather than 28 days as indicated in the QAPP. "Low level" phosphorus analyses, without acid preservation, are used in the Lahontan Region's SWAMP program. . | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 34530 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The annual average for 2007 exceeds the water quality objective for Total Phosphorus. Total Phosphorus was calculated by summing Orthophosphate as P and Phosphorus as P data. Phosphorus as P data were averaged when they were collected on the same day. 2 pairs were summed and then averaged for 2007 before comparing with the Total Phosphorus annual average objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | RWB6 Trend Monitoring CY2006 CY2007 | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Table 3-15 of the Basin Plan states that the water quality objective for Total P for East Walker River below Bridgeport Reservoir is 0.06 mg/L as an annual average. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at East Walker River, at CA/NV state line (630EWK001). | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on August and November 2007. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | |||||
QAPP Information: | 2002 QAMP (Quality Assurance Management Plan) for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version) | ||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 96896 | ||||
Pollutant: | Phosphorus | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 6 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Data were collected as part of regional routine SWAMP monitoring. Data were collected from one site between 2010 and 2015. Concentrations in the raw data ranged from 0.005 to 0.104 mg/L. Six annual averages were computed, none of which exceeded the water quality objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water). | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The site specific objective for total phosphorous in the East Walker River, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-15, is an annual average concentration not to exceed 0.06 mg/L. While this objective is written to apply to waters above Bridgeport Reservoir it has been used to assess the waters below the reservoir in recognition of the East Walker River as an interstate water which provides critical water resources to western Nevada. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | Data were collected from one location, 630EWK001, which is located just upstream of the CA/NV state boundary. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Data were collected between October 2010 and October 2015 predominantly once per quarter. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data were collected in accordance with the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program | ||||
DECISION ID |
69434 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Sedimentation/Siltation |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not Delist from 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Sources: | Source Unknown |
Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2019 |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The original listing was based on best professional judgment regarding a single severe sedimentation incident. Water Board staff did not review quantitative data in connection with the listing. The applicable narrative water quality objective is antidegradation based. The 16 quarterly SWAMP samples are insufficient to establish baseline and trend conditions as required for assessment under Section 4.10 of the Listing Policy. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against removing this water segment-pollutant combination from the section 303(d) list. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the full range of variability in streamflows and constituent concentrations expected in streams of the Lahontan Region. Flows and concentrations in this segment are also affected by the timing of releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. 3. The quarterly SWAMP data are insufficient to establish baseline and trend conditions as required under Section 4.10 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 4.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met. |
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 4609 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sedimentation/Siltation | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Not Recorded | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 0 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Unspecified--This LOE is a placeholder to support a 303(d) listing decision made prior to 2006. | ||||
Data Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Unspecified | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | Unspecified | ||||
Guideline Reference: | Placeholder reference pre-2006 303(d) | ||||
Spatial Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Unspecified | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | Unspecified | ||||
QAPP Information: | Unspecified | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5051 | ||||
Pollutant: | Sediment | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | None | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 16 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled suspended sediment under the Region 6 SWAMP program, at quarterly intervals between 2001 and 2005, and did load calculations based on concurrent flows. Suspended sediment concentrations in 16 samples ranged from 5 to 28 mg/L. Calculated sediment loads in 8 samples ranged from 0.37 to 23 tons/day. Sampling frequency is insufficient to evaluate compliance with the objective. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative objective states: ¿The suspended sediment load and suspended sediment discharge rate of surface waters shall not be altered in such a manner as to cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses.¿ | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Sixteen quarterly samples were collected between 2001 and 2005. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
68798 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Aluminum |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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. None of the samples exceed the applicable water quality objective and criterion. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the seasonal and annual variability expected in streamflows and constituent concentrations in streams of the Lahontan Region. 3. None of four samples exceeded the water quality objective or freshwater aquatic life criterion, 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 Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5065 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled aluminum under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Total recoverable aluminum concentrations in four samples ranged from 59 to 110 ug/L. The state MCLs were not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The primary MCL for aluminum is 1000 ug/L and the secondary MCL is 200 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5746 | ||||
Pollutant: | Aluminum | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled aluminum under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Concentrations of dissolved aluminum in four samples ranged from 2 to 18 ug/L. The aquatic life criteria were not exceeded. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency acute freshwater aquatic life criterion for aluminum is 750 ug/L, and the chronic criterion is 87 ug/L. Aquatic life criteria are expressed as dissolved metals. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70065 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Antimony |
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 Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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. None of the samples exceed the aquatic life criteria or the Maximum Contaminant Level. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the seasonal and annual variability expected in streamflows and constituent concentrations in streams of the Lahontan Region. 3. None of four samples exceeded the water quality objective or 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 Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7716 | ||||
Pollutant: | Antimony | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled antimony under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Four dissolved antimony samples all had concentrations below the detection limit. Per listing policy Section 6.1.5.5, the criteria are presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The USEPA Lowest Observed Effect Levels (LOEL) criteria for protection of aquatic life include an acute antimony value of 9000 ug/L, a chronic value of 1600 ug/L and a limit for toxicity to algae of 610 ug/L | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Compilation of Water Quality Goals | ||||
Quality Criteria for Water 1986. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Regulations and Standards. Washington D.C. EPA 440/5-86-001. | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5122 | ||||
Pollutant: | Antimony | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled antimony under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Four total antimony samples all had concentrations below the detection limit. Per listing policy Section 6.1.5.5, the MCL and CTR standard are presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The California primary MCL for antimony is 6 ug/L. The California Toxics Rule water and fish consumption standard is 14 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70237 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Beryllium |
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 Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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. None of the samples exceed the applicable water quality objective and 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 section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the seasonal and annual variability expected in streamflows and constituent concentrations in streams of the Lahontan Region. 3. None of 8 samples exceeded the applicable water quality objective and 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 Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5763 | ||||
Pollutant: | Beryllium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled beryllium quarterly in the East Walker River under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Four dissolved beryllium samples had reported concentrations below the detection level. Per listing policy Section 6.1.5.5, the objective is presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) freshwater aquatic life criteria for beryllium are as follows: acute (1 hour average) criterion = 130 ug/L; chronic (4 day average) criterion = 5.3 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA | ||||
2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | |||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. The segment of the river between Bridgeport Reservoir and the state line supports a trophy brown trout fishery. In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, the East Walker River is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use and the Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species use. The latter designation reflects the watershed¿s role as habitat for the threatened Lahontan cutthroat trout. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5068 | ||||
Pollutant: | Beryllium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled beryllium under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Four total recoverable beryllium samples had reported concentrations less than the detection limit. Per listing policy Section 6.1.5.5, the MCL is presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituents" objective. The MCL for beryllium is 4 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
71165 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Cadmium |
Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
Revision Status | Original |
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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 of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the California Toxics Rule standards or Maximum Contaminant Level. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the seasonal and annual variability expected in streamflows and constituent concentrations in streams of the Lahontan Region. 3. None of four samples exceeded the applicable standards 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 Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7689 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled cadmium under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 ad 2002. Four total cadmium samples had reported concentrations less than the detection limit. Per listing policy Section 6.1.5.5, the CTR standards are presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) aquatic life standards for cadmium are hardness-based. At the hardness levels measured for this station, the acute toxicity standard ranges from 2.29 to 2.75 ug/L and the chronic toxicity standard ranges from 1.45 to 1.65 ug/L. | ||||
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: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5070 | ||||
Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological survey sampled cadmium under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 ad 2002. Four total cadmium samples had reported concentrations less than the detection limit. Per listing policy Section 6.1.5.5, the MCL is presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's "Chemical Constituent" objective. The MCL for cadmium is 5 ug/L. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
70138 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Calcium |
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 Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. There are no California or federal standards or water quality criteria for calcium. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. There are no applicable standards or criteria and the data cannot be assessed pursuant to 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 Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7719 | ||||
Pollutant: | Calcium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled the East Walker River under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Concentrations of dissolved calcium in four samples ranged from 17 to 20 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There are no state or federal standards or criteria for calcium for the protection of freshwater aquatic life. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7720 | ||||
Pollutant: | Calcium | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The U.S. Geological Survey sampled the East Walker River under the Region 6 SWAMP program in 2001 and 2002. Concentrations of total calcium in four samples ranged from 16.9 to 18.6 mg/L. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | There are no state or federal standards or criteria for calcium for the protection of human health. | ||||
Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended) | ||||
Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
Guideline Reference: | |||||
Spatial Representation: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
71428 |
Region 6 |
East Walker River, below Bridgeport Reservoir |
||
Pollutant: | Chromium (total) |
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 Staff Conclusion: | This pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous assessment cycle.
No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the 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. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list in the Water Quality Limited Segments category. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the seasonal and annual variability expected in streamflows and constituent concentrations in streams of the Lahontan Region. 3. None of four samples exceeded the Califoria Toxics Rule standards or the Maximum Contaminant Level 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 Staff Decision Recommendation: | This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same. |
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 7695 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium (total) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Cold Freshwater Habitat | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The USGS sampled the East Walker River under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Concentrations of dissolved chromium in four quarterly samples were all below the detection level. Under Listing Policy section 6.1.5.5 the standards are presumed to be attained. | ||||
Data Reference: | 2007. SWAMP Data for the West Walker River and East Walker River Hydrologic Units | ||||
SWAMP Data: | SWAMP | ||||
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) standards for dissolved Chromium VI to protect freshwater aquatic life are11 ug/L ( 4-day average) and,16 ug/L (1 hour average). The CTR standard for Chromium III is hardness dependent. At the hardness levels reported for this station, acute (1 hour average) limits for Chromium III range from 349.71 to 398.82 ug/L. The chronic (4 day average) limits range from 113.41 to 129.37 ug/L. | ||||
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: | One station, East Walker River at the California-Nevada State Line, was sampled. | ||||
Temporal Representation: | Four quarterly samples were collected in 2001 and 2002. | ||||
Environmental Conditions: | The East Walker River is an interstate river, influenced by geothermal springs, agricultural and highway drainage, and releases from Bridgeport Reservoir. Headwater streams originate near the Sierra Nevada crest. The state line is in an area transitional to Great Basin environmental conditions. | ||||
QAPP Information: | Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP. | ||||
QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
LOE ID: | 5748 | ||||
Pollutant: | Chromium (total) | ||||
LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
Matrix: | Water | ||||
Fraction: | Total | ||||
Beneficial Use: | Municipal & Domestic Supply | ||||
Number of Samples: | 4 | ||||
Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | The USGS sampled the East Walker River under the Re |