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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 7 - Colorado River Basin Region

Water Body Name:	Wiest Lake
Water Body ID:	CAL7231000020000127135508
Water Body Type:	Lake & Reservoir


DECISION ID	8576

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 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. 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 fish tissue samples 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 8576


LOE ID:	5572

Pollutant:	Aldrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8577

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 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 8577


LOE ID:	5560

Pollutant:	Arsenic
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:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in lake. One fish fillet sample result could not be used in this assessment because the constituent was not analyzed for in the sample. The 1 fish fillet sample that was acceptable was generally collected in 12/1999. 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 1 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8578

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 section 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. 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 fish tissue samples 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 8578


LOE ID:	5580

Pollutant:	Chlordane
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5549

Pollutant:	Chlordane
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8579

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. 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 fish tissue samples 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 8579


LOE ID:	5550

Pollutant:	Chlorpyrifos
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8581

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 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. 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 fish tissue samples 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 8581


LOE ID:	5552

Pollutant:	Diazinon
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8582

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 section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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 fish tissue samples 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 8582


LOE ID:	5599

Pollutant:	Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8583

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 3.1 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 fish tissue samples exceeded either the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines 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 8583


LOE ID:	5606

Pollutant:	Endosulfan
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5553

Pollutant:	Endosulfan
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8584

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 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. 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 fish tissue samples 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 8584


LOE ID:	5614

Pollutant:	Endrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5554

Pollutant:	Endrin
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8585

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. 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 fish samples 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 8585


LOE ID:	5555

Pollutant:	Ethion
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8586

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 section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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 fish tissue samples exceeded the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.

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 8586


LOE ID:	5624

Pollutant:	Heptachlor
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8587

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 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. 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 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline, and none of 2 fish tissue samples 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 8587


LOE ID:	5633

Pollutant:	Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5556

Pollutant:	Heptachlor epoxide
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:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in lake. One fish fillet sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentrations. The 1 fish fillet sample that was acceptable was generally collected in 12/1999. 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 4 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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):


DECISION ID	8588

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 section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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 fish tissue samples 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 8588


LOE ID:	5557

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:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8589

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 3.5 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 fish tissue samples 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 8589


LOE ID:	6733

Pollutant:	Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) (mixture)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8590

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

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. 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 fish tissue samples exceeded either the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment or the National Academy of Sciences fish tissue guidelines 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 8590


LOE ID:	6741

Pollutant:	Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5558

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:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8591

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 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. 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. 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 of 1 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. None of 2 fish tissue samples 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 8591


LOE ID:	5646

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5444

Pollutant:	PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
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:	1

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in lake. One fish fillet sample result could not be used in this assessment because the sample results were non-detect and the detection limit was above the criteria concentrations. The 1 fish fillet sample that was acceptable was generally collected in 12/1999. Of these total samples, 1 sample collected at 1 location exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. The exceedance was found in a largemouth bass fillet composite sample collected on 12/06/1999 (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 3.6 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. The exceedance was found in the sample collected on 12/06/1999.
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	8592

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 section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.5 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 fish tissue samples 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 8592


LOE ID:	5445

Pollutant:	Selenium
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in lake. The sample were generally collected in 10/1998 and 12/1999. Of these total samples, none exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8593

Pollutant:	Toxaphene
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. 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 fish tissue sample exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline. None of 2 fish tissue samples 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 8593


LOE ID:	5657

Pollutant:	Toxaphene
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5559

Pollutant:	Toxaphene
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:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in lake. One fish fillet 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 1 fish fillet sample that was acceptable was generally collected in 12/1999. 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 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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	8580

Pollutant:	DDT
Final Listing Decision:	List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision:	New Decision
Revision Status	Revised
Sources:	Source Unknown
Expected TMDL Completion Date:	2021
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution:	Pollutant

Weight of Evidence:	This pollutant is 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. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two fish tissue samples exceeded the water quality objective. When compared to the OEHHA 21 ug/kg threshold, there were no exceedances out of 35 fish tissue samples taken. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification for placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the section 303(d) list. 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, 2 out of 2 fish tissue samples exceeded the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment fish tissue guideline used to interpret the water quality objective and this exceeds the allowable frequency calculated from the equation 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 met.

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

SWRCB Board Decision / Staff Recommendation:

USEPA Decision:

Lines of Evidence (LOEs) for Decision ID 8580


LOE ID:	5588

Pollutant:	DDT
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Warm Freshwater Habitat

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	0

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, neither exceeded 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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999.
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:	5551

Pollutant:	DDT
LOE Subgroup:	Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix:	Tissue
Fraction:	Total

Beneficial Use:	Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms

Number of Samples:	2
Number of Exceedances:	2

Data and Information Type:	Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Asses Water Quality:	Two fish fillet samples were taken at 1 location in the lake. The samples were generally collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Of these two samples, both exceeded the OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal. The exceedances were found in 2 largemouth bass fillet composite samples collected on 10/31/1989, and 12/06/1999 (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 Wiest Lake.
Temporal Representation:	Two largemouth bass fillet composite samples were collected in 10/1989 and 12/1999. Exceedances were found in samples collected on 10/31/1989, and 12/06/1999.
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.