Final California 2020 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 6 - Lahontan Region

Water Body Name:	Cedar Creek
Water Body ID:	CAR6412004020020529113658
Water Body Type:	River & Stream


DECISION ID	101364	Region 6
Cedar Creek

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 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 lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the eight 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 eight 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 101364, Alkalinity as CaCO3	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

98203

Pollutant:

Alkalinity as CaCO3

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 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:

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	101365	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Boron
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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. Four of the five samples exceed the site specific objective for boron. 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. Four of five samples exceeded the objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 101365, Boron	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

96262

Pollutant:

Boron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by Lahontan SWAMP staff as part of routine water quality monitoring. A total of eight samples were collected over a six year period. 5 annual average values can be computed. The annual averages range from 0.013 mg/L to 0.47 mg/L, and 4 of the 5 computed values exceed 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 boron objective for Cedar Creek, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7, is an annual average of 0.03 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 site, 641CDR002, located near Highway 299 to the west of the town of Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Data collection began with one event in September 2010, and then continued with one event in May 2012. Between 2013 and 2015 data were collected twice-yearly, predominantly in late spring and early fall.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data were collected according to the Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	103715	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Fluoride
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One lines of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of eight 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 eight 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 103715, Fluoride	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

98207

Pollutant:

Fluoride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	101367	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Iron
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that are both based on the same single sample assessed on the COLD and MUN beneficial uses. Zero of one samples exceed the 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 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 101367, Iron	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97118

Pollutant:

Iron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2010-09-16

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 101367, Iron	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97083

Pollutant:

Iron

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2010-09-16

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	71175	Region 6
Cedar Creek

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 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. Zero of sixteen 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 sixteen samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71175, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97252

Pollutant:

Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71175, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

7539

Pollutant:

Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey sampled Cedar Creek between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. One of eight quarterly samples for nitrite plus nitrate was below the detection level. Concentrations in the remainder of the samples ranged from 0.001 to 0.261 mg/L. The MCL was not exceeded.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

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:

The sample was collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight quarterly samples for nitrite plus nitrate were collected between 2003 and 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71175, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

98516

Pollutant:

Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 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:

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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2010-09-16

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	70852	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Nitrogen
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 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. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of 8 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 satisfies 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. 3. 1 of 8 samples exceeds 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 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70852, Nitrogen	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

96264

Pollutant:

Nitrogen

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by Lahontan SWAMP staff as part of routine water quality monitoring. A total of seven samples were collected over a four year period. 4 annual average values can be computed. The annual averages range from 0.06 mg/L to 0.08 mg/L, and 0 of the 4 computed values exceed 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 nitrogen objective for Cedar Creek, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7, is an annual average of 0.2 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 site, 641CDR002, located near Highway 299 to the west of the town of Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Data collection began with one event in May 2012. Between 2013 and 2015 data were collected twice-yearly, predominantly in late spring and early fall.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data were collected according to the Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70852, Nitrogen	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4829

Pollutant:

Total Nitrogen as N

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey sampled Cedar Creek between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Calculated concentrations of Total N in 8 samples ranged from 0.113 to 0.391 mg/L. The annual average objective was exceeded in one of three years.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The site-specific objective for total nitrogen in Cedar Creek is 0.2 mg/L (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight samples for the constituents of total nitrogen were collected over 3 years, with 2-3 sampling runs per year. Three annual average calculations were done.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70852, Nitrogen	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5372

Pollutant:

Total Nitrogen as N

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one sample in August 2002. The NO3-N concentration in one sample was 0.09 mg/L.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The site-specific objective for total nitrogen in Cedar Creek is 0.2 mg/L (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek."

Temporal Representation:

One sample for nitrate nitrogen was collected in August 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management owns land in the lower watershed.

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	71327	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Nitrogen, Nitrate
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board 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. The quarterly SWAMP samples and the single BLM sample 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 in one line of evidence or the single sample in the other exceeded the MCL and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71327, Nitrogen, Nitrate	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

7545

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

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 nitrate is 45 mg/L expressed "as nitrate." This is equivalent to 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:

Eight samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight quarterly samples for nitrite plus nitrate were collected between 2003 and 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71327, Nitrogen, Nitrate	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5373

Pollutant:

Nitrate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one sample in August 2002. The NO3-N concentration in one sample was 0.09 mg/L. The MCL was not violated

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek."

Temporal Representation:

One sample for nitrate nitrogen was collected on August 13, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	71385	Region 6
Cedar Creek

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 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 are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 9 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. 3. 0 of 9 samples exceeded the Maximum Contaminant Level and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71385, Nitrogen, Nitrite	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97226

Pollutant:

Nitrogen, Nitrite

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2010-09-16

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71385, Nitrogen, Nitrite	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

7547

Pollutant:

Nitrite as Nitrite NO2

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

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:

Eight samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight quarterly samples for nitrite plus nitrate were collected between 2003 and 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	70614	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Oxygen, Dissolved
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence, two which evaluate dissolved oxygen saturation data for the COLD beneficial use and four which evaluate dissolved oxygen data for the COLD beneficial use, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 3 dissolved oxygen saturation samples and 2 of 13 dissolved oxygen 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 CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 0 of 3 dissolved oxygen saturation samples and 2 of 13 dissolved oxygen samples exceed the water quality objectives 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 per fraction assessed 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70614, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5370

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one dissolved oxygen sample at Cedar Creek in 2002. The dissolved oxygen concentration in one sample was 7.8 mg/L, in violation of the objective.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The 1-day minimum objective for waters designated for the Cold Freshwater Habitat and Spawning, Reproduction and Development uses 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:

Samples were collected at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek".

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected in August 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70614, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

129995

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 3 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2013-07-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70614, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5724

Pollutant:

Dissolved oxygen saturation

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey sampled Cedar Creek under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Two measurements of percent saturation, taken in October 2004 and July 2005, were 102 and 103 percent. The objective was not violated.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide narrative objective for dissolved oxygen provides that percent saturation shall not be depressed more than 10 percent nor shall the minimum dissolved oxygen concentration 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Two percent saturation samples were collected in October 2004 and July 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70614, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

6356

Pollutant:

Dissolved oxygen saturation

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one sample on August 13, 2002. Percent saturation of dissolved oxygen was 81 percent. The objective was not violated.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at one station, Upper Cedar Creek.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on August 13, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70614, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4828

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey took six dissolved oxygen measurements between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. The minimum concentration was 8.6 mg/L. The objective was not violated.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The 1 day minimum objective for waters designated for the Cold Freshwater Habitat and Spawning, Reproduction and Development uses 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Six samples were collected over 3 years (2 to 3 samples/year between 2003 and 2005).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70614, Oxygen, Dissolved	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

129998

Pollutant:

Oxygen, Dissolved

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 3 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2013-07-10

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	103716	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Sodium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	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 that assess the same dataset for AGR and MUN. Zero of seven samples exceed the MUN guideline and zero of seven 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.Zero of seven samples exceed the MUN guideline and zero of seven 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 103716, Sodium	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97155

Pollutant:

Sodium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 103716, Sodium	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97273

Pollutant:

Sodium

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Agricultural Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 7 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:

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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-05-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	70374	Region 6
Cedar Creek

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 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 seventeen samples exceed the guideline for specific conductivity. 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 seventeen 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70374, Specific Conductivity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4827

Pollutant:

Specific Conductance

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey took 8 specific conductance measurements between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Specific conductance ranged from 149 to 245 uS/cm. An additional laboratorty measurement was 239 uS/cm. The MCL was not exceeded.

Data Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient waters designated for the Municipal and Domestic Supply use under the "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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight field measurements were taken over 3 years (2 to 3 samples/year between 2003 and 2005). A single laboratory measurement was also taken.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
Chloride concentrations in the lower reach of the creek may be influenced by windblown salts from the dry lake bed.

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70374, Specific Conductivity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5383

Pollutant:

Specific Conductance

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one specific conductance measurement in 2002. Specific conductance was 63 uS/cm. The MCL was not exceeded.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

One station was sampled.

Temporal Representation:

One measurement of specific conductance was made in 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
Chloride concentrations in the lower reach of the creek may be influenced by windblown salts from the dry lake bed.

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70374, Specific Conductivity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97091

Pollutant:

Specific Conductivity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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:

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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	103717	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Sulfates
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 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. Zero of eight 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 eight 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 103717, Sulfates	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

97092

Pollutant:

Sulfates

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	71386	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Turbidity
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 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, three that assess for COLD however these lines of evidence do not have an assessment guideline, and four that assess for MUN. Zero of nine sample exceed the COLD objective, and four of 17 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 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 nine sample exceed the COLD objective, and four of 17 samples exceed the MUN 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

7540

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 between 2004 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Two of three quarterly measurements for turbidity expressed as NTRU were below the detection level. The third measurement was 12 NTRU. Sampling frequency was insufficient to document natural background conditions or allow detection of change.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The applicable Lahontan Basin Plan objective for this watershed 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Three measurements of turbidity as NTRU were taken in October 2004 and April and July 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4835

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 in 203 and 2004 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. One of five quarterly measurements for turbidity expressed as NTU was below the detection level. The remainder of the samples ranged from 2.4 to 26 NTU. Sampling frequency was insufficient to document natural background conditions or allow detection of change.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Five turbidity measurements expressed as NTU were taken between May 2003 and June 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5389

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one turbidity measurement in 2002. Turbidity was 6.9 NTU.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

One turbidity measurement was taken in 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

98234

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 8 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Turbidity.

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. 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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

7541

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 between 2004 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Two of three quarterly measurements for turbidity expressed as NTRU were below the detection level. The third measurement was 12 NTRU. Because NTU and NTRU are not directly comparable, this measurement is not in violation of the MCL.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

California 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Three measurements of turbidity as NTRU were taken in October 2004 and April and July 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5390

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management measured turbidity once in 2002. Turbidity was 6.9 NTU. This sample exceeded the MCL.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-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 secondary MCL for turbidity is 5 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU).

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

One station, "Upper Cedar Creek", was sampled.

Temporal Representation:

One turbidity measurement was taken on August 13, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71386, Turbidity	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4836

Pollutant:

Turbidity

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Turbidity in 4 samples ranged from 2.4 to 26 NTU. An additional sample was below the detection level. The MCL was exceeded in three of the 5 samples reported as NTU.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Five quarterly measurements of turbidity as NTU were taken between June 2004 and July 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	71274	Region 6
Cedar Creek

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 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. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, three 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 Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71274, pH	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5371

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one pH measurement in August 2002. The pH was 7.83 units. The objective was not violated.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan 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 sample was collected at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek."

Temporal Representation:

One pH measurement was taken on August 13, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No information on quality assurance was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71274, pH	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4832

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey measured pH between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. There were no violations of the 6.5 to 8.5 units objective in 8 field measurements and 1 laboratory measurement. (Field pH ranged from 7.5 to 8.3 units, and the laboratory measurement ws 8.2 units.) There are insufficient data available to characterize normal ambient pH levels and evaluate compliance with the 0.5 unit limit on pH changes.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight field pH measurements were taken over 3 years (2 to 3 per year between 2003 and 2005). .

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71274, pH	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

129712

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71274, pH	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4831

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey measured pH between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. There were no violations of the 6.5 to 8.5 units objective in 8 field measurements and 1 laboratory measurement. (The field measurements ranged from 7.5 to 8.3 units and the laboratory measurement was 8.2 units.)

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The pH objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight field pH measurements were taken over 3 years (2 to 3 per year between 2003 and 2005).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71274, pH	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

129711

Pollutant:

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

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:

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) (641CDR002)

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the dates of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	70280	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Chloride
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:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2031
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two of which are based on the same data assessed for MUN and COLD beneficial uses. Eight of the eight 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 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 eight samples exceed the objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70280, Chloride	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4974

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical monitoring (conventional pollutants only)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey collected 8 chloride samples between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Chloride concentrations ranged from 4.35 to 8.13 mg/L. The MCL was not exceeded.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight samples were collected over 3 years (2 to 3 samples/year between 2003 and 2005).

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
Chloride concentrations in the lower reach of the creek may be influenced by windblown salts from the dry lake bed.

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70280, Chloride	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4826

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey collected 8 chloride samples between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Chloride concentrations ranged from 4.35 to 8.13 mg/L. Calculated annual average values exceeded the objective in three of three years.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The site-specific chloride objective for Cedar Creek (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7) is an annual average of 1 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight samples were collected over 3 years (2 to 3 samples/year between 2003 and 2005). Three annual average calculations were done.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
Chloride concentrations in the lower reach of the creek may be influenced by windblown salts from the dry lake bed.

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70280, Chloride	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

96263

Pollutant:

Chloride

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by Lahontan SWAMP staff as part of routine water quality monitoring. A total of eight samples were collected over a six year period. 5 annual average values can be computed. The annual averages range from 7.9 mg/L to 15.3 mg/L, and 5 of the 5 computed values exceed 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 chloride objective for Cedar Creek, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7, is an annual average of 1.0 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 site, 641CDR002, located near Highway 299 to the west of the town of Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data were collected according to the Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program


DECISION ID	70418	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Indicator Bacteria
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:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2031
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.3 and 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.3 and 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Seven lines of evidence, one which evaluates E. coli data for the REC-1 beneficial use, four which evaluate fecal coliform data for the MUN beneficial use and two evaluating fecal coliform data for the REC-1 beneficial use written during a previous assessment cycle, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 8 E. coli Statistical Threshold Value (STV) samples exceed the objective for the REC-1 beneficial use; 6 of 15 fecal coliform log-mean samples exceed the objective for the MUN beneficial use; 3 of 9 fecal coliform STV samples exceed the objective for the MUN beneficial use; Other fecal coliform data from a previous assessment cycle assessed as ancillary evidence during the 2018 cycle because the water quality standard has now changed is as follows: 2 of 7 fecal coliform log-mean samples and 1 of 1 fecal coliform STV samples exceed the now superseded objectives for the REC-1 beneficial use. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the 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 satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. 6 of 15 fecal coliform log-mean samples exceeded the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

6375

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Water column surveys (e.g. fecal coliform)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one sample in August 2002. The fecal coliform count was 45 colonies per 100 mL, exceeding the limit in the objective.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-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:

The sample was collected at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek."

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on August 13, 2002..

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No information on quality assurance was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5686

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Water column surveys (e.g. fecal coliform)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey sampled Cedar Creek under the Region 6 SWAMP program between 2003 and 2005. The fecal coliform counts in five of seven samples were estimates or below detection levels. Counts in the two remaining samples were 22 and 80 colonies per 100 mL.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Seven samples were collected between 2003 and 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

129122

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 4 of the 8 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 the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water).

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): 641CDR002

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the days of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30 .

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

6374

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Water column surveys (e.g. fecal coliform)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one sample in August 2002. The fecal coliform count was 45 colonies per 100 mL, exceeding the limit in the objective.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

The sample was collected at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek."

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on August 13, 2002..

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No information on quality assurance was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

129320

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 2 of the 8 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 the SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring (tissue and water).

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

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): 641CDR002

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the days of 2010-09-16 and 2015-09-30 .

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

100072

Pollutant:

Escherichia coli (E. coli)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PATHOGEN MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Water Board staff assessed SWAMP RWB6 Monitoring data for Cedar Creek to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 8 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 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(s), station(s): 641CDR002

Temporal Representation:

The samples were collected between the days of 2012-05-17 and 2015-09-30 .

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70418, Indicator Bacteria	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5687

Pollutant:

Fecal Coliform

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Water Contact Recreation

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Water column surveys (e.g. fecal coliform)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Seven samples were collected between 2003 and 2005.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	80294	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Total Dissolved Solids
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:	A Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2031
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant, two of which are based on the same dating assessing for both the MUN and COLD beneficial uses. The results reported here are for the COLD beneficial use which is the more stringent of the two. Eight of the eight annual average 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 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 eight samples exceed the site specific objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 80294, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

96265

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

Data were collected by Lahontan SWAMP staff as part of routine water quality monitoring. A total of eight samples were collected over a six year period. 5 annual average values can be computed. The annual averages range from 145 mg/L to 177 mg/L, and 5 of the 5 computed values exceed 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 total dissolved solids (TDS) objective for Cedar Creek, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7, is an annual average of 100 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 site, 641CDR002, located near Highway 299 to the west of the town of Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Data collection began with one event in September 2010, and continued with one event in May 2012. Between 2013 and 2015 data were collected twice-yearly, predominantly in late spring and early fall.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

Data were collected according to the Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Quality Assurance Program Plans, Quality Assurance Project Plans, and Standard Operating Procedures for the SWAMP program

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 80294, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4837

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey collected 8 samples for TDS between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Annual average concentrations exceeded the objective in 3 of 3 years. Single sample concentrations ranged from 125 to 164 mg/L.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The site-specific Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) objective for Cedar Creek (Lahontan Basin Plan Table 3-7) is an annual average of 100 mg/L.

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight samples were collected over 3 years (2 to 3 samples/year between 2003 and 2005). Three annual average calculations were done.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest. TDS concentrations in the lower reach of the creek may be influenced by windblown salts from the dry lake bed.

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 80294, Total Dissolved Solids	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4838

Pollutant:

Total Dissolved Solids

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Municipal & Domestic Supply

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey collected 8 samples for TDS between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Single sample concentrations ranged from 125 to 164 mg/L. The MCL was not exceeded.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

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 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight samples were collected over 3 years (2 to 3 samples per year between 2003 and 2005).

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest. TDS concentrations in the lower reach of the creek may be influenced by windblown salts from the dry lake bed.

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	70970	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Phosphate
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant 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, each consisting of a single phosphate sample, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. There are no numerical phosphate objectives for this stream. No biological data are available to determine whether of the samples exceed the water quality objective for biostimulatory substances. 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. One of the lines of evidence satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. The other does not. 2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. Only one sample was available in each dataset. 3. It is not possible to determine whether the biostimulatory substances objective was exceeded. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70970, Phosphate	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5381

Pollutant:

Phosphate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management collected one sample in 2002. The PO4-P concentration was 0.028 mg/L No data on algae or macrophytes are available to allow assessment of compliance with the narrative biostimulatory substances objective..

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Lahontan Basin Plan does not include site-specific objectives for phosphorus for Cedar Creek. The regionwide narrative objective applies. It 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:

Sampling was done at one station, "Upper Cedar Creek."

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on August 13, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, Cedar Creek is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use..

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with this dataset.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70970, Phosphate	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

7559

Pollutant:

Phosphate

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

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 dissolved phosphate sample under the Region 6 SWAMP program in March 2004. The PO4-P concentration was 0.034 mg/L No data on algae or macrophytes are available to allow assessment of compliance with the narrative biostimulatory substances objective..

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Sampling was done at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

One sample was collected on March 24, 2004.

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, Cedar Creek is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use..

QAPP Information:

Data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	70850	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Phosphorus
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant 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. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. No biological information is available to assess whether the 8 total phosphorus samples exceed the water quality objective for biostimulatory substances. 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 do not satisfy the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy due to an error in the SWAMP QAPP regarding holding times for total phosphorus samples.. 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. Because of the lack of biological data, it is not possible to determine whether the water quality objective was exceeded. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70850, Phosphorus	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4833

Pollutant:

Phosphorus

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Dissolved

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey sampled Cedar Creek between 2003 and 2005 under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Concentrations of total phosphorus in 8 samples collected over 3 years ranged from 0.39 to 0.128 mg/L. No data on algae or macrophytes are available to allow assessment of compliance with the narrative biostimulatory substances objective..

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight samples were collected over 3 years (2 to 3 samples/year between 2003 and 2005).

Environmental Conditions:

Cedar Creek is a tributary of Middle Alkali Lake, an ephemeral desert playa lake in Surprise Valley, Modoc County. The creek originates in the Warner Mountains, and most of its upper watershed is within Modoc National Forest.
In addition to the Cold Freshwater Habitat beneficial use, Cedar Creek is designated for the Spawning, Reproduction and Development use..

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):


DECISION ID	71273	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Sediment
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant 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: The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative water quality objective is an antidegradation based objective that provides that there shall be no increases in suspended sediment concentrations or loads. This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d)list under section 3.10 of the Listing Policy, which deals with trends in water quality. One line of evidence, based on quarterly sampling, is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. It includes seven suspended sediment concentration values and six suspended sediment load values calculated from instantaneous discharge measurements. Suspended sediment concentrations and loads are dependent on flows and can change rapidly over a short time during storm or snowmelt runoff events. Quarterly samples are insufficient to capture these short term events and therefore are insufficient to define natural background suspended sediment concentrations and loads, or to detect trends. Listing Policy Section 3.10 requires that natural background conditions be established. 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 Listing Policy. Quarterly samples do not capture the seasonal and annual variability expected in streamflows and constituent concentrations in streams of the Lahontan Region. 3. Sampling frequency was insufficient to establish natural background conditions and therefore does not meet the requirements of Listing Policy Section 3.10. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 71273, Sediment	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4830

Pollutant:

Sediment

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey collected 7 suspended sediment samples over 3 years under the Region 6 SWAMP program and did six loading calculations based on concurrent flow data. The average suspended sediment concentration of 7 samples was 32.8 mg/L; the average suspended sediment load in 6 samples was 1.36 tons/day. There is insufficient information available to document the normal range of suspended sediment loads and concentrations, to assess whether the sediment regime has been altered, or to assess effects on beneficial uses.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide narrative objective for suspended sediment 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:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Seven suspended sediment samples were collected over 3 years (2-3 samples/year, 2003 to 2005). Six loading calculations were done over 3 years (1 to 3 calculations/year). Temporal representation is inadequate to permit assessment of background conditions, alterations, or effects on beneficial uses.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	70264	Region 6
Cedar Creek

Pollutant:	Temperature, water
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board Conclusion:	This pollutant 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: The Lahontan Basin Plan's narrative temperature objective is an antidegradation-based objective that requires that there be no change in temperature in waters designated for the Cold Freshwater Habitat (COLD) beneficial use. The objective does not include specific numerical limits for protection of the COLD use. Listing Policy Section 3.10 contains directions for assessment based on trends in water quality. These directions include requirements to establish specific baseline conditions and specify the influence of seasonal and interannual effects. Two lines of evidence are available to support this decision; one consists of a single temperature measurement. There are not enough temperature samples to establish baseline conditions (including diel, seasonal, annual and interannual variations in temperature) or to detect declining trends in the temperature regime if such trends exist. No quality assurance information was submitted with the USBLM dataset. Because the SWAMP temperature samples were collected only quarterly, weekly and monthly average data are not available for comparison with guidelines in the scientific literature for the temperature requirements of sensitive aquatic species such as salmonids, as directed in Listing Policy Section 6.1.5.9.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70264, Temperature, water	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

4834

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey measured water temperature in Cedar Creek under the Region 6 SWAMP program. The temperature in 8 field measurements ranged from 3 to 16.5 degrees Celsius. Sampling frequency was inadequate to document the natural temperature regime or to show whether alterations have occurred.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The sections of the narrative temperature objective in the Lahontan Basin Plan that apply to Cedar Creek are as follows:

"The natural receiving water temperature of all waters shall not be altered unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that such an alteration in temperature does not adversely affect the water for beneficial uses.

For waters designated WARM, water temperature shall not be altered by more than five degrees Fahrenheit ... above or below the natural temperature. For waters designated COLD, the temperature shall not be altered."

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

Samples were collected at one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight temperature measurements were taken over 3 years (2003 to 2005). Temporal representation was inadequate to document the natural temperature regime (including diel, seasonal, and annual variations) or to show whether alterations have occurred.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70264, Temperature, water	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

5386

Pollutant:

Temperature, water

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

None

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management took one measurement of water temperature in Cedar Creek in August 2002. The temperature was 17 degrees Celsius.

Data Reference:

Water quality data for surface waters on U.S Bureau of Land Management lands in Lassen and Modoc Counties

SWAMP Data:

Non-SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

Objective/Criterion Reference:

Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)

Evaluation Guideline:

Guideline Reference:

Spatial Representation:

One station, "Upper Cedar Creek" was sampled.

Temporal Representation:

One temperature measurement was taken on August 13, 2002.

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

No quality assurance information was submitted with the data.

QAPP Information Reference(s):


DECISION ID	70898	Region 6
Cedar Creek

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	Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Regional Board 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. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. No biological information is available to determine whether any of the Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen samples exceed the water quality objective for biostimulatory substances. 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. There are no associated biological data to allow assessment of compliance with the objective for biostimulatory substances. 3. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

Regional Board Decision Recommendation:	This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.

State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:

State Board Decision Recommendation:	After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.

Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 70898, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)	Region 6
Cedar Creek

LOE ID:

6359

Pollutant:

Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)

LOE Subgroup:

Pollutant-Water

Matrix:

Water

Fraction:

Total

Beneficial Use:

Cold Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:

Number of Exceedances:

Data and Information Type:

Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)

Data Used to Assess Water Quality:

The U.S. Geological Survey sampled Cedar Creek under the Region 6 SWAMP program. Concentrations of TKN in 8 quarterly samples ranged from 0.11 to 0.2 mg/L. No data on algae or macrophytes were available for assessment of compliance with the objective for biostimulatory substances.

Data Reference:

2007. SWAMP Data for Waters of the Surprise Valley Hydrologic Unit

SWAMP Data:

SWAMP

Water Quality Objective/Criterion:

The Lahontan Basin Plan does not include a site-specific objective for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) in Cedar Creek. (A separate line of evidence has been prepared for the site-specific objective for Total Nitrogen.) The 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 one station, Cedar Creek near Cedarville.

Temporal Representation:

Eight quarterly samples were collected over 3 years (2-3 samples/year, 2003 to 2005).

Environmental Conditions:

QAPP Information:

The data meet the quality assurance requirements of the SWAMP QAPP.

QAPP Information Reference(s):