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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 6 - Lahontan Region

Water Body Name: Sweet Water Creek
Water Body ID: CAR6301002020171025037411
Water Body Type: River & Stream
 
DECISION ID
101787
Region 6     
Sweet Water 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101787, Alkalinity as CaCO3
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99005
 
Pollutant: Alkalinity as CaCO3
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Alkalinity as CaCO3.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for Alkalinity as CaCO3 for the protection of freshwater aquatic life is not less than 20000 ug/L. (National Recommended Water Quality Criteria 2016)
Objective/Criterion Reference: National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Current as of 08/03/2016.
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101788
Region 6     
Sweet Water 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 line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101788, Fluoride
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99003
 
Pollutant: Fluoride
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Fluoride.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Maximum Contaminant Level for Fluoride incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 2 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101789
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
Pollutant: Manganese
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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 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 101789, Manganese
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99008
 
Pollutant: Manganese
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Manganese.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region¦s Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). The secondary maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Manganese is 0.05 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101790
Region 6     
Sweet Water 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: 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.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 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 101790, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99049
 
Pollutant: Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water 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 data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101791
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
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. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101791, Oxygen, Dissolved
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 129985
 
Pollutant: Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Oxygen, Dissolved.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: For waters with the beneficial uses of COLD, COLD with SPWN, WARM, and WARM with SPWN, the minimum dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be less than that specified in Table 3-6. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101792
Region 6     
Sweet Water 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. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101792, Sulfates
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99031
 
Pollutant: Sulfates
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sulfate.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for Sulfate 250 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101793
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
Pollutant: Total Dissolved Solids
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. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101793, Total Dissolved Solids
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99032
 
Pollutant: Total Dissolved Solids
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Total Dissolved Solids.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for Total Dissolved Solids is 500 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101794
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
Pollutant: Turbidity
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101794, Turbidity
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99035
 
Pollutant: Turbidity
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Turbidity.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL) based upon drinking water standards specified in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. The Lahontan Basin Plan also has regionwide turbidity objective for other beneficial uses that states: Waters shall be free of changes in turbidity that cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for beneficial uses. Increases in turbidity shall not exceed natural levels by more than 10%.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: California Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) apply to ambient surface waters under the Lahontan Basin Plan's \Chemical Constituents\" objective. The Secondary MCL for turbidity is 5 NTU. Calculation of a numeric objective for other beneficial uses requires comparison with upstream or other background data which may not be available as part of the data used for water quality assessment. "
Guideline Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 15. Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101795
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
Pollutant: Zinc
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. 0 of 2 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 2 samples exceeded the 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 3.2.
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 101795, Zinc
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99055
 
Pollutant: Zinc
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Zinc.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations to protect aquatic life in freshwater. The criterion in freshwater is hardness dependent for each sample and varies based on the ambient hardness during sampling. Section (b)(1) in CTR contains the hardness dependent formula for the metals criterion.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 101795, Zinc
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 99056
 
Pollutant: Zinc
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed STORET data for Sweet Water Creek to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Zinc.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states that waters designated as MUN shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the maximum contaminant level (MCL) or secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL). This is based upon drinking water standards specified in the following provisions of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations which are incorporated by reference into the Water Quality Control Plan: Table 64431-A of Section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals), Table 64431-B of Section 64431 (Fluoride), Table 64444-A of Section 64444 (Organic Chemicals), Table 64449-A of Section 64449 (Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels-Ranges). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64449-A for Zinc is 5 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
 
DECISION ID
101796
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
Pollutant: pH
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. pH assessments require background information about water quality conditions in the waterbody. These background conditions were unavailable for this assessment and the data could not be assessed. The computed sample size is 0. 0 of 0 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 CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 0 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board 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 101796, pH
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 129856
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality standard for pH. Although pH data does exist for this waterbody, the objective for this pollutant requires background information that is currently unavailable, and therefore an assessment of water quality standards could not be made.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide objective for pH states: \In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units. The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis.\""
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 101796, pH
Region 6     
Sweet Water Creek
 
LOE ID: 129857
 
Pollutant: pH
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: None
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: 0 of 0 samples exceeded the water quality standard for pH. Although pH data does exist for this waterbody, the objective for this pollutant requires background information that is currently unavailable, and therefore an assessment of water quality standards could not be made.
Data Reference: Water quality data for federal, state, and tribal agencies submitted through the US EPA STorage and RETrival (STORET) database for the 2018 listing cycle.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Lahontan Basin Plan's regionwide objective for pH states: \In fresh waters with designated beneficial uses of COLD or WARM, changes in normal ambient pH levels shall not exceed 0.5 pH units. For all other waters of the region, the pH shall not be depressed below 6.5 nor raised above 8.5 units. The Regional Board recognizes that some waters of the Region may have natural pH levels outside of the 6.5 to 8.5 range. Compliance with the pH objective for these waters will be determined on a case-by-case basis.\""
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (21NEV1_WQX-NV09-301-T-006)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-26 and 2012-07-26
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: QAPP not required for federal data
QAPP Information Reference(s): This is a placeholder reference for data that was collected after QAPP requirements were developed, but exempt from the requirements.