Draft 2008 California 303(d)/305(b) Integrated Report

Supporting Information

Regional Board 7 - Colorado River Basin Region

Water Body Name:	Havasu, Lake
Water Body ID:	CAL7140000020040823161128
Water Body Type:	Lake & Reservoir

DECISION ID	8959
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8959

LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8929
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses, or human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from this water. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8929

LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8961
Pollutant:	.beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when either consuming water and organisms, or consuming organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8961

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8930
Pollutant:	.beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting either aquatic life uses, or human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8930

LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9029
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9029

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9043
Pollutant:	1,1,1-Trichloroethane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9043

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9053
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Both lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 1 water sample exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9053

LOE ID:	7668
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.0005 mg/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.0005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, and 0.001 mg/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9024
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these waters, or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9024

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9030
Pollutant:	1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 1 sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9030

LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9042
Pollutant:	1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9042

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8978
Pollutant:	1,2-Dichloroethane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Two lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these waters. None of 1 water sample exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms from these waters, or the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8978

LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7668
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.0005 mg/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.0005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, and 0.001 mg/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9032
Pollutant:	1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9032

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8979
Pollutant:	1,2-Dichloropropane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these water, or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8979

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8958
Pollutant:	Acenaphthene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organism only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8958

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8510
Pollutant:	Aldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8510

LOE ID:	5566
Pollutant:	Aldrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9027
Pollutant:	Aluminum
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL or secondary MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9027

LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8962
Pollutant:	Anthracene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8962

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8511
Pollutant:	Antimony
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 34 water samples exceeded California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms, or consuming organisms alone from this water. None of 34 water samples exceed the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8511

LOE ID:	5160
Pollutant:	Antimony | Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel and Antimony were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.006 mg/l Antimony, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.002 mg/l Mercury, and 0.1 mg/l Nickel (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel and Antimony.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5146
Pollutant:	Antimony | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Thirty-four water quality samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 14 ug/l Antimony, and 610 ug/l Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Thirty-four discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5151
Pollutant:	Antimony | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Thirty-four water quality samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 4300 ug/l Antimony, and 4600 ug/l Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Thirty-four discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID	8520
Pollutant:	Arsenic
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 71 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the drinking water MCL. None of 71 water samples exceeded the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service criteria. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8520

LOE ID:	5157
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Barium | Fluoride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.050 mg/l Arsenic, 1 mg/l Barium, and 2 mg/l Fluoride (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7684
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected biannually in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the USFWS Biological Effect Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Effect Criteria for the protection of aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 0.25 mg/l Arsenic, and 15 mg/l Copper (USFWS, 1998).
Guideline Reference:	Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5171
Pollutant:	Arsenic
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USFWS Biological Effects criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Bilogical Effects Criteria of 0.25 mg/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (USDOI, 1998).
Guideline Reference:	Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5138
Pollutant:	Arsenic
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples , none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 340 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	9047
Pollutant:	Atrazine
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9047

LOE ID:	7671
Pollutant:	Atrazine | Simazine
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Atrazine, and 0.004 mg/l Simazine (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8522
Pollutant:	Barium
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 69 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8522

LOE ID:	5157
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Barium | Fluoride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.050 mg/l Arsenic, 1 mg/l Barium, and 2 mg/l Fluoride (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8524
Pollutant:	Benzene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. The results of these lines of evidence will be combined with the results from another line of evidence in the Final Use Rating. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 8 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organism from these waters, or the drinking water MCL. None of 7 water samples exceeded the CTR criteria protecting human health when consuming only organisms from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8524

LOE ID:	5148
Pollutant:	Benzene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	7
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 7 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 1.2 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5162
Pollutant:	Benzene | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	7
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 7 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples , none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.013 mg/l Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7668
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.0005 mg/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.0005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, and 0.001 mg/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5153
Pollutant:	Benzene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	7
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 7 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 71 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID	9013
Pollutant:	Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs)
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these waters. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9013

LOE ID:	7622
Pollutant:	Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) of 1450 ug/kg for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8963
Pollutant:	Benzo[a]anthracene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8963

LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9006
Pollutant:	Benzo[b]fluoranthene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9006

LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9008
Pollutant:	Benzo[k]fluoranthene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of one water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9008

LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8527
Pollutant:	Beryllium
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 34 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8527

LOE ID:	5158
Pollutant:	Beryllium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Forty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Fifteen water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 5/15/1996 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.004 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Forty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 5/15/1996 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 8 discrete dates in 1996, 2 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 5/15/1996 through 1/28/2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8965
Pollutant:	Bromoform
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 is 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 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. Of the two lines of evidence, none of 1 sample or none of 2 samples exceeded CTR criteria. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8965

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8513
Pollutant:	Cadmium
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Six lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 36 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 36 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 2 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8513

LOE ID:	5144
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 1.4 ug/l Mercury, and the Hardness Dependent Concentrations of Cadmium and Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7630
Pollutant:	Cadmium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependant Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5160
Pollutant:	Antimony | Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel and Antimony were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.006 mg/l Antimony, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.002 mg/l Mercury, and 0.1 mg/l Nickel (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel and Antimony.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7692
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Silver
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the following limits: 10 ug/l Cadmium, 50 ug/l Lead, 4 ug/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 100 ug/l Methoxychlor, and 50 ug/l Silver (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9052
Pollutant:	Carbon tetrachloride
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. All three lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 1 water sample exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9052

LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7668
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.0005 mg/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.0005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, and 0.001 mg/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8505
Pollutant:	Chlordane
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded either the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8505

LOE ID:	5447
Pollutant:	Chlordane
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 5.6 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).
Guideline Reference:	Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	5574
Pollutant:	Chlordane
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8531
Pollutant:	Chloride
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 71 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL. 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8531

LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5167
Pollutant:	Chloride | Sulfates
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 500 mg/l Chloride, and 500 mg/l Sulfate (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8966
Pollutant:	Chlorobenzene (mono)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only form these water. None of 2 water sample exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8966

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8507
Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8507

LOE ID:	5448
Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 10000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):

DECISION ID	8535
Pollutant:	Chromium (total)
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 37 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria or the drinking water MCL. None of two sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8535

LOE ID:	5142
Pollutant:	Chromium (total)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1724 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5159
Pollutant:	Chromium (total) | Selenium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.050 mg/l Chromium, and 0.050 mg/l Selenium (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9044
Pollutant:	Chrysene (C1-C4)
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9044

LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8538
Pollutant:	Copper
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Nine 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 44 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service criteria. None of 44 water samples exceeded either the drinking water MCL, or the secondary MCL. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8538

LOE ID:	5145
Pollutant:	Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	42
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Twenty-seven water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 42 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 at 6 locations. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion of 1300 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 3/2/1995 through 1/28/2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5168
Pollutant:	Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	42
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Twenty-seven water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 42 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/2/1995 through 1/8/2004 at 6 locations. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 1 mg/l for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 3/2/1995 through 1/28/2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5172
Pollutant:	Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	42
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Twenty-seven water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 42 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 at 6 locations. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USFWS Biological Effects criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Bilogical Effects Criteria of 15 mg/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (USDOI, 1998).
Guideline Reference:	Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7617
Pollutant:	Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7684
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected biannually in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the USFWS Biological Effect Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	United State Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Biological Effect Criteria for the protection of aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 0.25 mg/l Arsenic, and 15 mg/l Copper (USFWS, 1998).
Guideline Reference:	Guidelines for Interpretation of the Biological Effect of Selected Constituents in Biota, Water, and Sediment. US Department of Interior report.
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5139
Pollutant:	Copper
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	42
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Twenty-seven water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 42 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8508
Pollutant:	DDT
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded either the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8508

LOE ID:	5449
Pollutant:	DDT
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 21 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).
Guideline Reference:	Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	5582
Pollutant:	DDT
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 1000 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7642
Pollutant:	DDT
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) for pp'-DDT of 1.1 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8539
Pollutant:	Diazinon
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Department of Fish and Game criteria. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8539

LOE ID:	7620
Pollutant:	Diazinon
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDFG Hazardous Assessment Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Hazardous Assessment Criteria of 0.16 ug/l for the protection of aquatic life uses (Siepmann and Finlayson, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5450
Pollutant:	Diazinon
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 300 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	8964
Pollutant:	Dibenz[a,h]anthracene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8964

LOE ID:	7661
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Benzo[a]anthracene | Benzo[b]fluoranthene | Benzo[k]fluoranthene | Carbon tetrachloride | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Dibenz[a,h]anthracene | Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: Benzene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Anthracene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.049 Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, 0.049 ug/l Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, 4.4 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.049 ug/l Chrysene, 0.049 ug/l Dibenzo(a,h)Anthracene, 3.2 ug/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.049 ug/l Indeno(1,2,3-cd) Pyrene, and 11 ug/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8974
Pollutant:	Dichlorobromomethane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 1 water sample exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8974

LOE ID:	7668
Pollutant:	1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | Benzene | Carbon tetrachloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample results could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.0005 mg/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.0005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, and 0.001 mg/l 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9049
Pollutant:	Dichloromethane
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Both lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Neither 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9049

LOE ID:	7645
Pollutant:	Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 48 ug/l Methyl Bromide, and 5 ug/l Dichloromethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water samples was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7658
Pollutant:	Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide | Vinyl chloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 4000 ug/l Methyl Bromide, 1600 ug/l Dichloromethane, and 525 ug/l Vinyl Chloride (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water samples was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8541
Pollutant:	Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8541

LOE ID:	5592
Pollutant:	Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8542
Pollutant:	Endosulfan
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Both lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. Neither 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded either the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines and these do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8542

LOE ID:	5451
Pollutant:	Endosulfan
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 20,000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	5601
Pollutant:	Endosulfan
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	8931
Pollutant:	Endosulfan sulfate
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8931

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8543
Pollutant:	Endrin
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 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. Two lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses or human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8543

LOE ID:	5608
Pollutant:	Endrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Field procedures described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. Used CDFG's Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	5452
Pollutant:	Endrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 1000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8932
Pollutant:	Endrin aldehyde
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8932

LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8933
Pollutant:	Enterococcus
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan Enterococcus water quality objectives for RECI or RECII beneficial uses. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8933

LOE ID:	7611
Pollutant:	Enterococcus
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan:In the Colorado River the maximum allowable Enterococcus density is 305 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7608
Pollutant:	Enterococcus
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan:In the Colorado River the maximum allowable Enterococcus density is 61 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8545
Pollutant:	Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 7 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan E. coli water quality objectives for RECI or RECII beneficial uses. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8545

LOE ID:	5178
Pollutant:	Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples:	5
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Six water samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 5 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 9/01/1999 through 4/24/2003. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan:?for the Colorado River, the following maximum allowables shall apply:REC2 E. Coli 1175 per 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099, 100144).
Temporal Representation:	Six discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/01/1999 through 4/24/2003. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1999, 3 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, and 1 date in 2003.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7697
Pollutant:	Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan:In the Colorado River the maximum allowable E. coli density is 235 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7703
Pollutant:	Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Non-Contact Recreation
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan:In the Colorado River the maximum allowable E. coli density is 1175 MPN/ 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5177
Pollutant:	Escherichia coli (E. Coli)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Water Contact Recreation
Number of Samples:	5
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Six water samples taken at 5 locations on the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 5 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 9/01/1999 through 4/24/2003. Of these total samples , none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan:?for the Colorado River, the following maximum allowables shall apply:REC1 E. Coli 235 per 100 ml (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099, 100144).
Temporal Representation:	Six discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 9/01/1999 through 4/24/2003. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1999, 3 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, and 1 date in 2003.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8546
Pollutant:	Ethion
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample exceeded 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8546

LOE ID:	5475
Pollutant:	Ethion
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 2000 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	8547
Pollutant:	Ethylbenzene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Six 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 6 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 6 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8547

LOE ID:	5163
Pollutant:	Ethylbenzene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	4
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake, 8 water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 4 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.3 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5154
Pollutant:	Ethylbenzene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	4
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Eight water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 4 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 29,000 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5149
Pollutant:	Ethylbenzene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	4
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Eight water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 4 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 3100 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	9003
Pollutant:	Fluoranthene
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9003

LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9009
Pollutant:	Fluorene
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9009

LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8523
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 69 samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8523

LOE ID:	5157
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Barium | Fluoride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.050 mg/l Arsenic, 1 mg/l Barium, and 2 mg/l Fluoride (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8548
Pollutant:	Heptachlor
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Three line of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8548

LOE ID:	5618
Pollutant:	Heptachlor
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8549
Pollutant:	Heptachlor epoxide
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water sample exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8549

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5626
Pollutant:	Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	7633
Pollutant:	.alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Aldrin | Arsenic | Chlordane | Chromium (total) | Dieldrin | Endrin | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 3 ug/l Aldrin, 0.22 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 340 ug/l Arsenic, 0.22 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 2.4 ug/l Chlordane 1724 ug/l Chromium, 0.24 ug/l Dieldrin, 0.086 ug/l Endrin, 0.52 ug/l Heptachlor, and 0.52 Heptachlor Epoxide (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8551
Pollutant:	Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8551

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5453
Pollutant:	Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 20 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	9010
Pollutant:	Hexachlorobutadiene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these waters. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9010

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8552
Pollutant:	Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (mixture)
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8552

LOE ID:	6727
Pollutant:	Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (mixture)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	8555
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Three 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three of 47 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8555

LOE ID:	5132
Pollutant:	Iron
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	47
Number of Exceedances:	3
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-three water samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake. Sixteen water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 47 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/2/1995 through 1/8/2004. Of these total samples , 3 exceeded the CDPH SMCL. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 7/27/1995, 12/11/1996, and 3/18/1997, from three different locations (56227, 100098, and 100102) (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.3 mg/l for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-three discrete water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 3/2/1995 through 1/8/2004.Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 2 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, and 1 date in 2003. The exceedences were found in samples collected from 7/27/1995 through 3/18/1997.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods, similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using USEPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8557
Pollutant:	Lead
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 36 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the Basin Plan water quality objective for MUN beneficial use. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8557

LOE ID:	7692
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Silver
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the following limits: 10 ug/l Cadmium, 50 ug/l Lead, 4 ug/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 100 ug/l Methoxychlor, and 50 ug/l Silver (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7636
Pollutant:	Lead | Nickel | Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR hardness dependent criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Lead,Nickel, Silver, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5174
Pollutant:	Lead
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified below?Lead 0.05 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5141
Pollutant:	Lead
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8558
Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollution
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded either the drinking water MCL or the Basin Plan water quality objective for the MUN beneficial use. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded either the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment of National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8558

LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7692
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Silver
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the following limits: 10 ug/l Cadmium, 50 ug/l Lead, 4 ug/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 100 ug/l Methoxychlor, and 50 ug/l Silver (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	6735
Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 100 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	5454
Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 30 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Field procedures described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. Used CDFG's Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	8504
Pollutant:	Low Dissolved Oxygen
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Thirteen water samples exceeded the water quality objective. When compared to the Basin Plan 8 mg/l threshold, there were 13 exceedances out of 49 total water samples taken over all the sampling years. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient information for placing this water segment-pollutant combination from the 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. At a minimum, 13 out of 49 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. However, Lake Havasu is an interstate water bordering California and Ariziona. It is not possible to accurately assess the level of impairment in this water because of inadequate information regarding out-of-state sources and conflicting criteria for this constituent. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8504

LOE ID:	5137
Pollutant:	Oxygen, Dissolved
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Cold Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	49
Number of Exceedances:	13
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Forty-nine measurements were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 8/20/1992 through 3/14/2006. Of these total measurements , 13 exceeded the Basin Plan Objective. The exceedances were found in measurements collected on 8/20/1992, 7/27/1994, 6/28/1995, 7/25/1995, 8/23/1995, (2)9/21/1995, 5/16/1996, 8/08/1996, 5/29/1997, 7/06/2000, 9/30/2003, andf 1/28/2004, from the three different locations (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: The dissolved oxygen concentration shall not be reduced below the following minimum levels at any time: For water designated for both WARM and COLD Beneficial Uses... 8.0 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100099).
Temporal Representation:	Fortynine discrete measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 8/20/1992 through 3/14/2006. Measurements were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1992, 1 date in 1993, 2 dates in 1994, 17 dates in 1995, 9 dates in 1996, 3 dates in 1997, 3 dates in 1998 , 2 dates in 2000, 4 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, 1 date in 2004, and 1 date in 2006. The exceedences were found in measurements collected from 8/20/1992 through 1/28/2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8560
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 16 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8560

LOE ID:	5133
Pollutant:	Manganese
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	14
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Thirrty-one water samples were taken at 3 locations on the lake. Seventeen water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 14 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 7/25/1995 through 1/27/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.050 mg/l for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100099).
Temporal Representation:	Thirty-one discrete water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 3/3/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 8 discrete dates in 1995, 5 dates in 1996, 2 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 2 dates in 2000, 6 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 2 dates in 2003, and 1 date in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods, similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using USEPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8514
Pollutant:	Mercury
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Ten lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Four lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. The results of these line of evidence will be combined with the results from other line of evidence where possible in the Final Use Rating. Two water lines of evidence recieved a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because of Poor Quality Assurance. In these two lines of evidence greater than 90 percent of the sample results could not be used because of the data quantitation requirements of section 6.1.5. Two water lines of evidence contain 2 out of four samples that exceed the water quality objectives. These exceedances may result in a listing. However, most of the sample results could not be used because of poor QA. Had the quality of the data been better, these exceedances would not have resulted in a listing decisions. This indicates that there is insufficient information to conclude that Mercury is an impairment 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 35 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 36 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting aquatic life uses. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Two of 5 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms or organisms alone from these water. These exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. However, because of the poor QA, there is insufficient information to conclude that Mercury is impairing these water. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8514

LOE ID:	7666
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.051 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5160
Pollutant:	Antimony | Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel and Antimony were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.006 mg/l Antimony, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.002 mg/l Mercury, and 0.1 mg/l Nickel (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel and Antimony.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7639
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentration (CMC) of 1.4 ug/l for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were usually collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5547
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish tissue sample was collected at one location in the interior of the lake. The fish tissue sample was collected on 10/28/1987. This sample did not exceeded the OEHHA Screening Value (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Screening Value of 0.3 mg/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 1999).
Guideline Reference:	Prevalence of Selected Target Chemical Contaminants in Sport Fish From Two California Lakes: Public health designed screening study. Sacramento, CA: Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One fish tissue sample was collected. One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/28/1987.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Field procedures described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. Used CDFG's Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.
LOE ID:	5135
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	4
Number of Exceedances:	2
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-seven water samples were taken at 3 locations on the lake. Sixty-three water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The four acceptable water quality samples were collected on 2/07/2001, and 11/28/2001 at 3 locations in the lake. Of these total samples, 2 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 11/28/2001 from the two midlake locations (100102 and 100099) (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.051 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), and midlake (100102 and 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-seven water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 3/2/1995 through 1/8/2004.Samples were collected on 10 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 2 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, and 2 dates each in 2002, 2003, and 2004. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 11/28/2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods, similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using USEPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5144
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 1.4 ug/l Mercury, and the Hardness Dependent Concentrations of Cadmium and Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5131
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	4
Number of Exceedances:	2
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-seven water samples were taken at 3 locations on the lake. Sixty-three water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The four acceptable water quality samples were collected on 2/07/2001, and 11/28/2001 at 3 locations in the lake. Of these total samples, 2 exceeded the CTR Criteria. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 11/28/2001 from the two midlake locations 100102 and 100099) (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.050 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), and midlake (100102 and 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-seven water samples were collected. Water samples were generally collected and analyzed from 3/2/1995 through 1/8/2004.Samples were collected on 10 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 2 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, and 2 dates each in 2002, 2003, and 2004. The exceedences were found in samples collected on 11/28/2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods, similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using USEPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7676
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.002 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected in 2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7653
Pollutant:	Mercury
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceed the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 0.050 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9034
Pollutant:	Methoxychlor
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objective. None of 2 water samples exceeded the USEPA drinking water criteria and drinking water MCL. These do not exceed 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9034

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7692
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Silver
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the following limits: 10 ug/l Cadmium, 50 ug/l Lead, 4 ug/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 100 ug/l Methoxychlor, and 50 ug/l Silver (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7627
Pollutant:	Methoxychlor
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the USEPA criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	USEPA Drinking Water Criteria of 40 ug/l for the protection of drinking water uses (USEPA, 2002).
Guideline Reference:	National recommended water quality criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047 Washington, D.C. USEPA
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8526
Pollutant:	Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Four 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 9 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL or secondary MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8526

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5170
Pollutant:	Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	7
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 7 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 0.005 mg/l for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5162
Pollutant:	Benzene | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	7
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 7 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples , none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Benzene, 0.013 mg/l Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9050
Pollutant:	Methyl bromide
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Both lines of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in each line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9050

LOE ID:	7645
Pollutant:	Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 48 ug/l Methyl Bromide, and 5 ug/l Dichloromethane (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water samples was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7658
Pollutant:	Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide | Vinyl chloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 4000 ug/l Methyl Bromide, 1600 ug/l Dichloromethane, and 525 ug/l Vinyl Chloride (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water samples was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9036
Pollutant:	Molinate
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9036

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9045
Pollutant:	Naphthalene
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9045

LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8518
Pollutant:	Nickel
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Nine 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 36 water samples exceeded California Toxics Rule criteria protecting either aquatic life uses, or human health when consuming either organisms and water or consuming organisms alone from this water. None of 36 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guidelines. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8518

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5146
Pollutant:	Antimony | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Thirty-four water quality samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 14 ug/l Antimony, and 610 ug/l Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Thirty-four discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5151
Pollutant:	Antimony | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Thirty-four water quality samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 4300 ug/l Antimony, and 4600 ug/l Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Thirty-four discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5144
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: 1.4 ug/l Mercury, and the Hardness Dependent Concentrations of Cadmium and Nickel (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7636
Pollutant:	Lead | Nickel | Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR hardness dependent criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Lead,Nickel, Silver, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5160
Pollutant:	Antimony | Cadmium | Mercury | Nickel
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	34
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples taken at 6 locations on the lake for Cadmium and Mercury. Thirty-five water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. Thirty-four water quality samples from 5 locations for Nickel and Antimony were all acceptable. The 34 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, and 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.006 mg/l Antimony, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.002 mg/l Mercury, and 0.1 mg/l Nickel (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected for Mercury and Cadmium, 34 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004 for Mercury and Cadmium, 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004 for Nickel and Antimony. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Cadmium and Mercury. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004 for Nickel and Antimony.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8946
Pollutant:	Nitrate as Nitrate (NO3)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8946

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8562
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 70 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8562

LOE ID:	5156
Pollutant:	Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	70
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Seventy water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 10 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Seventy discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 9 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998, 2 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8957
Pollutant:	Nitrogen, Nitrite
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8957

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8563
Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Final Listing Decision:	Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1, 3.5, and 3.6 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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8563

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5638
Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the NAS tissue guideline (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	National Academy of Science (NAS) tissue guideline of 500 ug/kg for the protection of aquatic life uses (NAS, 1973).
Guideline Reference:	National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	6760
Pollutant:	Perchlorate
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)(2006)
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. No measurements of perchlorate exceed the guideline. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is insufficient justification in favor of 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 sediment quality guideline used complies with the requirements of section 6.1.3 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 3. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 4. A remedial effort has been underway since October 2002 to remove perchlorate from a source near Las Vegas, NV. Monitoring data collected before October 2002 are no longer representative of water quality in the River. 4. After September 2002, none of 31 water samples exceed the evaluation guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 6760

LOE ID:	5165
Pollutant:	Perchlorate
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	3
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Three water quality sample were taken at 3 locations on the lake, on 9/30/2003. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.006 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the north end (Station ID No. 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Three discrete samples were collected. The sample were all collected on 9/30/2003. Sample were collected on 1 discrete date in 2003.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
LOE ID:	755
Pollutant:	Perchlorate
LOE Subgroup:	Narrative Description Data
Matrix:	Not Specified
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:
Number of Exceedances:
Data and Information Type:	Not Specified
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	The source of perchlorate is a former perchlorate production site in Henderson, NV. At the site perchlorate enters a wash through groundwater and a surface seep. The perchlorate plume is intercepted at three locations and treated using ion exchange units and a biologically-based fluidized bed reactor. These treatment facilities are 99+ percent efficient at removing perchlorate. The treatment facilities have been operational since October 2002. Substantial reductions in the perchlorate concentrations entering Lake Mead have been realized.
Data Reference:	Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:
Objective/Criterion Reference:
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Henderson, NV.
Temporal Representation:
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	QA Info Missing
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID:	756
Pollutant:	Perchlorate
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	26
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Not Specified
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Monthly samples were collected by the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of S. CA at the Colorado River Aqueduct at Lake Havasu (MWD of Southern California, 2001). Twelve-month averages of the perchlorate concentrations were calculated and compared to the benchmark value of 6 ppb. Of the annual averages from 1998 to 2003 (6 averages), 4 were greater than 6 ppb. The averages in 2002 and 2003 were less than 6 ppb. Of the 76 single samples 21 were greater than 6 ppb. Note: Annual average concentration has declined from 6.4 ppb in 2000 to 4.8 ppb in 2003 (a 25% decrease) and further decreases are expected in 2004 and 2005 given the steady decline in the mass of perchlorate entering Lake Mead via Las Vegas Wash since early 2003. Before October 2002, only 3 samples had concentrations of perchlorate below 6 ppb. After September 2002, there have been no exceedances in 26 measurements.
Data Reference:	Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses.
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Evaluation Guideline:	OEHHA PHG = 6 ppb.
Guideline Reference:	Placeholder reference 2006 303(d)
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected at the intake to the Colorado River Aqueduct at Lake Havasu near Parker Dam.
Temporal Representation:	Samples were collected monthly from 1998 through 2004. Presently available data are from January 1998 to November 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	MWD QA/QC.
QAPP Information Reference(s):
LOE ID:	7614
Pollutant:	Perchlorate
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 0.006 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9046
Pollutant:	Phenanthrene
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.6 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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9046

LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9011
Pollutant:	Pyrene
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9011

LOE ID:	7699
Pollutant:	Arsenic | Benzo[a]anthracene | Cadmium | Chromium (total) | Chrysene (C1-C4) | Copper | Dieldrin | Endrin | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Mercury | Naphthalene | Nickel | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Phenanthrene | Pyrene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentrations (PECs) for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects were used for the following constituents: 33 mg/kg Arsenic, 1050 ug/kg Benz[a]anthrazene, 4.98 mg/kg Cadmium, 111 mg/kg Chromium, 1290 ug/kg Chrysene, 149 mg/kg Copper, 61.8 ug/g Dieldrin, 207 ug/kg Endrin, 2230 ug/kg Fluoranthene, 536 ug/kg Fluorene, 128 mg/kg Lead, 4.99 ug/kg Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 1.06 mg/kg Mercury, 561 ug/kg Naphthalene, 48.6 mg/kg Nickel, 1170 ug/kg Phenanthrene, 676 ug/kg PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls), and 1520 ug/kg Pyrene (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8572
Pollutant:	Salinity/TDS/Chlorides
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. One line of evidence is 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 102 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8572

LOE ID:	5166
Pollutant:	Total Dissolved Solids
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	102
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One hundred two water quality measurements were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 7/26/1994 through 3/15/2006. Of these total measurements, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 1,000 mg/l for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099, 100144).
Temporal Representation:	One hundred two discrete measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 7/26/1994 through 3/15/2006. Measurements were collected on 3 discrete dates in 1994, , 16 dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998, 2 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, 2 dates in 2004, and 2 dates in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	8536
Pollutant:	Selenium
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Four lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 35 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality objecitve. None of 37 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. None of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8536

LOE ID:	5159
Pollutant:	Chromium (total) | Selenium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.050 mg/l Chromium, and 0.050 mg/l Selenium (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5176
Pollutant:	Selenium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified below?Selenium 0.01 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5455
Pollutant:	Selenium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One fish fillet sample was taken at 1 location in the lake. The sample was generally collected in 10/1987. This sample did not exceed the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal (TSMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in fish and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported on the Toxic Substances Monitoring Program (TSMP) database. 1978-2000. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Sacramento, CA.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) Fish Contaminant Goal of 7400 ug/kg to protect human health when consuming fish (OEHHA, 2008).
Guideline Reference:	Development of Fish Contaminant Goals and Advisory Tissue Levels for Common Contaminants in California Sport Fish: Chlordane, DDTs, Dieldrin, Methylmercury, PCBs, Selenium, and Toxaphene
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One bluegill fillet composite sample was collected on 10/20/87.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The field procedures are described in TSMP Data Reports and associated Appendices. CDFG's Laboratory applies a Quality Assurance Program Plan procedures for laboratory Quality Assurance and Quality Control, as described in Rasmussen (1993).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Toxic Substances Monitoring Program 1991 Data Report. 93-1WQ. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), Division of Water Quality. Sacramento, CA.

DECISION ID	8567
Pollutant:	Silver
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Six 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 37 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the Basin Plan water quality objective. None of 37 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8567

LOE ID:	5143
Pollutant:	Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Silver, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5169
Pollutant:	Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.1 mg/l Silver, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7636
Pollutant:	Lead | Nickel | Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR hardness dependent criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Lead,Nickel, Silver, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7692
Pollutant:	Cadmium | Lead | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Silver
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the following limits: 10 ug/l Cadmium, 50 ug/l Lead, 4 ug/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 100 ug/l Methoxychlor, and 50 ug/l Silver (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5175
Pollutant:	Silver
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Waters designated for use as domestic or municipal supply (MUN) shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in excess of the limits specified below?Silver 0.05 mg/l (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	9048
Pollutant:	Simazine
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9048

LOE ID:	7671
Pollutant:	Atrazine | Simazine
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.001 mg/l Atrazine, and 0.004 mg/l Simazine (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8569
Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One out of 112 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8569

LOE ID:	5134
Pollutant:	Specific Conductivity
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	110
Number of Exceedances:	1
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One hundred and ten measurements were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 8/19/1992 through 3/15/2006. Of these total measurements, 1 exceeded the CDPH SMCL. The exceedence was found in a measurement collected on 7/07/1997 from one location on the south end (56227) (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 1600 umhos/cm for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	One hundred and ten discrete measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 8/19/1992 through 3/15/2006. Measurements were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1992, 2 in 1993, 5 dates in 1994, 15 dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 4 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, 2 dates in 2004, and 2 dates in 2006. The exceedence was found in a measurement collected on 7/07/1997.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7681
Pollutant:	Specific Conductance
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two measurements were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total measurements, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 1600 umhos for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected near the California Nevada Border. Measurements were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water quality measurements were collected. Water quality measurements were collected twice in 2002. Measurements were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9054
Pollutant:	Styrene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. The sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 sample exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9054

LOE ID:	7655
Pollutant:	Styrene | Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.1 mg/l Styrene, and 0.15 mg/l Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11) (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8533
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 71 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL. 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8533

LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5167
Pollutant:	Chloride | Sulfates
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	69
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water quality samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 500 mg/l Chloride, and 500 mg/l Sulfate (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	9014
Pollutant:	Tetrachloroethylene/PCE
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these waters or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 water sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9014

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8570
Pollutant:	Thallium
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 10 water samples exceeded the CTR criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms alone from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8570

LOE ID:	5155
Pollutant:	Thallium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	10
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Ten water quality samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 6.3 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 56227, 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Ten discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 2 dates in 2001, 1 date in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5150
Pollutant:	Thallium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	10
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Ten water quality samples were taken at 5 locations on the lake, generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 1.7 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 56227, 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Ten discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/18/1997 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1997, 2 dates in 2001, 1 date in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	9040
Pollutant:	Thiobencarb/Bolero
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL and the secondary MCL. 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9040

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8571
Pollutant:	Toluene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. Six 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 12 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 12 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8571

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5147
Pollutant:	Toluene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	10
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Two water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 10 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/2/2000 through 7/02/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 6800 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/02/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5152
Pollutant:	Toluene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	10
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Two water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 10 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/2/2000 through 7/02/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria of 200,000 ug/l for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/02/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5161
Pollutant:	Toluene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	10
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Two water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 10 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/2/2000 through 7/02/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) of 0.15 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/02/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9025
Pollutant:	Trichloroethylene/TCE
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. One line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming organisms from these waters or the drinking water MCL. None of 1 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming water and organisms from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9025

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7648
Pollutant:	1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Benzene | Bromoform | Carbon tetrachloride | Dichlorobromomethane | Hexachlorobutadiene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Trichloroethylene/TCE
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two samples were taken at 1 location in the interior of the lake. One water sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration. The one acceptable water quality sample was collected in 10/2002 at 1 location. This sample did not exceeded the CTR Criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1.2 ug/l Benzene, 4.3 ug/l Bromoform, 0.25 ug/l Carbon Tetrachloride, 0.56 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 0.38 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 0.52 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.44 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 0.80 ug/l Tetrachloroehtylene, 0.6 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 2.7 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9055
Pollutant:	Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. This sample did not 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 satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 sample exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9055

LOE ID:	7655
Pollutant:	Styrene | Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 0.1 mg/l Styrene, and 0.15 mg/l Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11) (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water sample was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8503
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Three 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Three out of 35 water samples exceeded the drinking water secondary MCL 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:	After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that though this water body is impaired for sediment toxicity, these water body-pollutant combinations should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards for these pollutants are not being exceeded
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8503

LOE ID:	7605
Pollutant:	Turbidity
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water quality measurements were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total measurements , none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 5 NTU for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water quality measurements were collected. Water quality measurements were collected twice in 2002. Measurements were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5136
Pollutant:	Turbidity
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	33
Number of Exceedances:	3
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Thirty three measurements were taken at 3 locations on the lake, generally collected from 7/27/1994 through 1/28/2004. Of these total measurements , 3 exceeded the CDPH SMCL. The exceedences were found in measurements collected on 3/03/1995 at one location, and 5/16/1996 at two locations (100099, and 100100) (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level (SMCL) of 5 NTU for consumer acceptance (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100099).
Temporal Representation:	Thirty three discrete measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 7/27/1994 through 9/30/2003. Measurements were collected on 1 discrete date in 1994, 8 dates in 1995, 6 dates in 1996, 2 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 2 dates in 2000, 6 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 1 date in 2004. The exceedences were found in measurements collected from 3/03/1995 through 5/16/1996.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.

DECISION ID	9051
Pollutant:	Vinyl chloride
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. This line of evidence received a Use Rating of Insufficient Information because there was only one sample reported in the line of evidence. According to Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy, the minimum number of samples required is 2. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 1 sample exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9051

LOE ID:	7658
Pollutant:	Dichloromethane | Methyl bromide | Vinyl chloride
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	1
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One water sample was collected in 5/2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. This sample did not exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 4000 ug/l Methyl Bromide, 1600 ug/l Dichloromethane, and 525 ug/l Vinyl Chloride (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	A sample was collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	One water samples was collected. A water sample was collected in 5/2002.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8573
Pollutant:	Xylenes (total) (mixed)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 11 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8573

LOE ID:	5164
Pollutant:	Xylenes (total) (mixed)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	9
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Twelve water samples were taken at 4 locations on the lake. Three water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 9 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/5/2001. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 1.75 mg/l for the protection of human health (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098), near the north end (100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Twelve discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/2000 through 7/05/2001. Samples were collected on 3 discrete dates in 2000, and 5 dates in 2001.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8568
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under sections 3.1 and 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Five lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 37 water samples exceeded either the California Toxics Rule criteria, or the drinking water secondary MCL. None of 2 sediment samples exceeded the sediment quality guideline. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8568

LOE ID:	7678
Pollutant:	Aluminum | Chloride | Copper | Manganese | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Silver | Sulfates | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.2 mg/l Aluminum, 500 mg/l Chloride, 1 mg/l Copper, 0.05 mg/l Manganese, 0.005 mg/l MTBE, 0.1 mg/l Silver, 500 mg/l Sulfate, 0.001 mg/l Thiobencarb, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7636
Pollutant:	Lead | Nickel | Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR hardness dependent criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Lead,Nickel, Silver, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	5143
Pollutant:	Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Hardness Dependent Criterion Maximum Concentrations (CMCs) for the protection of freshwater aquatic life uses were used for the following constituents: Silver, and Zinc (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	5169
Pollutant:	Silver | Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Nuisance
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	35
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Sixty-nine water samples were taken at 6 locations on the lake. Thirty-four water sample results could not be used in this assessment because either the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentration or the samples results were non-detect and the detection limit could not be determined. The 35 acceptable water quality samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH SMCL criteria (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs) for consumer acceptance were used for the following constituents: 0.1 mg/l Silver, and 5 mg/l Zinc (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64449 Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100100, 100101),and midlake (100102, 100099).
Temporal Representation:	Sixty-nine discrete samples were collected. Samples were generally collected from 3/02/1995 through 1/28/2004. Samples were collected on 11 discrete dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, and 2 dates in 2004.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7624
Pollutant:	Zinc
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Sediment
Matrix:	Sediment
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two sediment samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples , none exceeded the PEC (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	Consensus Based Sediment Quality Guideline Probable Effects Concentration (PEC) of 459 mg/kg for the protection of freshwater organisms to toxic effects (Macdonald et al, 2000).
Guideline Reference:	Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 39: 20-31
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two sediment samples were collected. Sediment samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	9031
Pollutant:	cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 9031

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8972
Pollutant:	m-Dichlorobenzene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8972

LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8968
Pollutant:	o-Dichlorobenzene
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8968

LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8973
Pollutant:	p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
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
Weight of Evidence:	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. 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 2 water samples exceeded the California Toxics Rule criteria protecting human health when consuming either water and organisms or organisms only from these waters. None of 2 water samples exceeded the drinking water MCL. These do 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8973

LOE ID:	7675
Pollutant:	1, 1-dichloroethane | 1,1,1-Trichloroethane | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,1-Dichloroethylene (DCE)/ Vinyldine Chloride | 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene | 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Aluminum | Arsenic | Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) | Cadmium | Chlordane | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Chromium (total) | Endrin | Ethylbenzene | Heptachlor | Heptachlor epoxide | Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB | Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH) | Methoxychlor | Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE) | Molinate | Nickel | Nitrate | Nitrogen, Nitrite | PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls) | Selenium | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Thiobencarb/Bolero | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | Xylenes (total) (mixed) | cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CDPH MCL (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:	California Department of Public Health (CDPH) Drinking Water Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) for the protection of human health were used for the following constituents: 1 mg/l Aluminum, 0.05 mg/l Arsenic, 0.0002 mg/l Benzo[a]Pyrene, 0.005 mg/l Cadmium, 0.0001 mg/l Chlordane, 0.05 mg/l Chromium, 0.6 mg/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 0.5 mg/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 0.005 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethane, 0.006 mg/l 1,1-Dichloroethylene, 0.006 mg/l cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, 0.01 mg/l 1,2-Dichloroethylene,-trans, 0.005 mg/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 0.002 mg/l Endrin, 0.3 mg/l Ethylbenzene, 0.00001mg/l Heptachlor, 0.00001 mg/l Heptachlor Epoxide, 0.001 mg/l Hexachlorobenzene, 0.0002 mg/l Lindane/Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH), 0.030 mg/l Methoxychlor, 0.013 mg/l Methly-Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MTBE), 0.02 mg/l Molinate, 0.070 mg/l Chlorobenzene (mono), 0.1 mg/l Nickel, 0.045 mg/l Nitrate, 0.001 mg/l Nitrite as N, 0.0005 mg/l PCBs (total), 0.05 mg/l Selenium, 0.005 mg/l Tetrachloroethylene, 0.07 mg/l Thiobencarb, 0.15 mg/l Toluene, 0.005 mg/l 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 0.2 mg/l 1,1,1-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 0.005 mg/l Trichloroethylene, and 1.75 mg/l Xylene (CCR, Title 22).
Guideline Reference:	Title 22, Division 4, Ch. 15, Article 4, Section 64431, Table 64431-A
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7665
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | 1,1,2-Trichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloroethane | 1,2-Dichloropropane | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Benzene | Bromoform | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Dichlorobromomethane | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Hexachlorobutadiene | Nickel | Pyrene | Tetrachloroethylene/PCE | Toluene | Trichloroethylene/TCE | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 2700 ug/l Acenaphthene, 71 ug/l Benzene, 0.014 ug/l alpha-BHC, 240 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 110000 ug/l Anthracene, 0.046 beta-BHC, 240 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 360 ug/l Bromoform, 21000 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 46 ug/l Dichlorobromomethane, 17000 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 2600 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 99 ug/l 1,2-Dichloroethane, 39 ug/l 1,2-Dichloropropane, 240 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.81 ug/l Endrin, 0.81 ug/l Endrin Aldehyde, 29000 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 370 ug/l Fluoranthene, 14000 ug/l Fluorene, 50 ug/l Hexachlorobutadiene, 4600 ug/l Nickel, 11000 ug/l Pyrene, 8.85 ug/l Tetrachloroethylene, 200000 ug/l Toluene, 42 ug/l 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, and 81 ug/l Trichloroethylene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).
LOE ID:	7651
Pollutant:	.alpha.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .alpha.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1) | .beta.-BHC (Benzenehexachloride) | .beta.-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 2) | Acenaphthene | Anthracene | Chlorobenzene (mono) | Endosulfan sulfate | Endrin | Endrin aldehyde | Ethylbenzene | Fluoranthene | Fluorene | Nickel | Pyrene | Toluene | m-Dichlorobenzene | o-Dichlorobenzene | p-Dichlorobenzene (DCB)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Dissolved
Beneficial Use:	Municipal & Domestic Supply
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two water samples were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total samples, none exceeded the CTR criteria (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	California Toxics Rule (CTR) Criteria for the protection of human health when consuming water and organisms from aquatic systems were used for the following constituents: 1200 ug/l Acenaphthene, 0.0093 ug/l alpha-BHC, 110 ug/l alpha-Endosulfan, 9600 ug/l Anthracene, 0.014 ug/l beta-BHC, 110 ug/l beta-Endosulfan, 680 ug/l Chlorobenzene, 1300 ug/l Copper, 2700 ug/l o-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l m-Dichlorobenzene, 400 ug/l p-Dichlorobenzene, 110 ug/l Endosulfan Sulfate, 0.76 ug/l Endrin, 0.76 Endrin Aldehyde, 3100 ug/l Ethylbenzene, 300 ug/l Fluoranthene, 1300 ug/l Fluorene, 610 ug/l Nickel, 960 ug/l Pyrene,and 6800 ug/l Toluene (USEPA, 2000).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Standards 2000. Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California: Rules and regulations. Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 97. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Samples were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water samples were collected. Water samples were collected twice in 2002. Samples were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).

DECISION ID	8566
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
Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status. Two 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 satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. None of 114 water samples exceeded the Basin Plan water quality 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.
RWQCB Board Decision / Staff 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.
SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:
USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8566

LOE ID:	5173
Pollutant:	pH
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	Total
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	112
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Other Agencies/Organizations provided monitoring data
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	One hundred twelve water quality measurements were taken at 7 locations on the lake, generally collected from 8/19/1992 through 3/15/2006. Of these total measurements, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (USEPA, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Since the regional waters are somewhat alkaline, pH shall range from 6.0-9.0 (CRBRWQCB, 2006).).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from the following Lake Havasu locations: near the south end (Station ID No. 100098, 56227), near the north end (100101, 100100),and midlake (100102, 100099, 100144).
Temporal Representation:	One hundred twelve discrete measurements were collected. Measurements were generally collected from 8/19/1992 through 3/15/2006. Measurements were collected on 2 discrete dates in 1992, 2 dates in 1993, 5 dates in 1994, 16 dates in 1995, 8 dates in 1996, 4 dates in 1997, 2 dates in 1998 , 3 dates in 2000, 8 dates in 2001, 2 dates in 2002, 3 dates in 2003, 2 dates in 2004, and 2 dates in 2006.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	Sampling was conducted in accordance with approved sampling methods similar to ADEQ, 2005. Sample analysis was carried out using EPA approved methods (USEPA, 2007).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Data for organic and inorganic chemicals in water samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7, collected and reported by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality and reported on the USEPA Storet system. 1995-2004.
	A Manual of Procedures for the Sampling of Surface Waters. Phoenix, AZ.
LOE ID:	7706
Pollutant:	pH
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Water
Matrix:	Water
Fraction:	None
Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat
Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0
Data and Information Type:	Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants)
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two measurements were collected in 2002 at 1 location in the interior of the lake. Of these total measurements, none exceeded the Basin Plan Objective (SWAMP, 2007).
Data Reference:	Data for organic and inorganic constituents in water and sediment samples collected from waterbodies located in the Colorado River Basin-Region 7. May 2002-May 2005.
Water Quality Objective/Criterion:	Basin Plan: Since the regional waters are somewhat alkaline, pH shall range from 6.0-9.0 (CRBRWQCB, 2006).
Objective/Criterion Reference:	Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan), Colorado River Basin-Region 7. Palm Desert, CA.
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
Spatial Representation:	Measurements were collected from one location in the interior of Lake Havasu.
Temporal Representation:	Two water quality measurements were collected. Water quality measurements were collected twice in 2002. Measurements were collected in May and October.
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information:	The sampling and analysis portions of this study were conducted in accordance with the SWAMP Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) (Puckett, 2002).
QAPP Information Reference(s):	Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version).