Draft California 2018 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report)

Supporting Information

Regional Board 6 - Lahontan Region

Water Body Name: Frog Lake
Water Body ID: CAL6352003020170823033001
Water Body Type: Lake & Reservoir
 
DECISION ID
102693
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
Pollutant: Chloride
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for chloride.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102693, Chloride
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 98705
 
Pollutant: Chloride
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Chloride.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for chloride is 250 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
102694
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
Pollutant: Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for nitrate/nitrite as N.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one samples exceeded the and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102694, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 97882
 
Pollutant: Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrate + Nitrite as N.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate + nitrite (as N) that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
102695
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, Nitrate
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for nitrate as N.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102695, Nitrogen, Nitrate
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 97830
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, Nitrate
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrate as N.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate (NO3 as N) incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region is 10.0 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
102696
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, Nitrite
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for nitrite as N.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List in the Water Quality Limited Segments category.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102696, Nitrogen, Nitrite
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 97064
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen, Nitrite
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Nitrite as N.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Basin, Objective for Municipal and Domestic Supply uses of inland surface waters states the following: waters shall not contain concentrations of inorganic chemicals in excess of the limits specified in California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Table 64431-A of section 64431 (Inorganic Chemicals). The maximum contaminant level listed in Table 64431-A for Nitrite as N is 1.0 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
102697
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
Pollutant: Sodium
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that are both based on the same single sample assessed for AGR and MUN. Zero of one samples exceed the AGR and MUN guidelines.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Zero of one samples exceeded the guidelines for AGR and MUN and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102697, Sodium
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 98214
 
Pollutant: Sodium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Agricultural Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sodium.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Water Quality for Agriculture, published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1985, contains criteria protective of various agricultural uses of water, including irrigation of various types of crops and stock watering. At or below the sodium threshold of 69 mg/L, agricultural uses of water should not be limited.
Guideline Reference: Water Quality for Agriculture, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 29, Rev 1, Rome (1985)
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102697, Sodium
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 97140
 
Pollutant: Sodium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sodium.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: Per the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories (USEPA 2012), the health advisory for sodium for individuals on a sodium-restricted diet is 20 mg/l.
Guideline Reference: 2012 Edition of the Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
102698
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
Pollutant: Sulfates
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Staff Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of one samples exceed the guideline for sulfate.

Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List.

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3.Zero of one samples exceeded the guideline and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.2 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Staff Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102698, Sulfates
Region 6     
Frog Lake
 
LOE ID: 98144
 
Pollutant: Sulfates
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for Frog Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Sulfate.
Data Reference: Water Quality Assessment Data for the 2018 solicitation cycle submitted through CEDEN for the EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012.
 
SWAMP Data: Non-SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: The California Secondary MCL that is incorporated by reference in the Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region for Sulfate 250 mg/L (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: The samples were collected at 1 monitoring site(s) (635L12200)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-07-23 and 2012-07-23
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan