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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 6 - Lahontan Region

Water Body Name: June Lake
Water Body ID: CAL6010004220011210101658
Water Body Type: Lake & Reservoir
 
DECISION ID
102933
Region 6     
June 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 Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102933, Chloride
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 98176
 
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 June 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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
78839
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Mercury
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.11 of the Listing Policy. Under this section when all other listing factors do not result in the listing of a water segment but information indicates non-attainment of standards, a water segment shall be evaluated to determine whether the weight of evidence demonstrates that water quality standard is not attained. If the weight of evidence indicates non-attainment, the water segment shall be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant that both assess the same fish tissue data for COMM and WILD. A new mercury objective was recently adopted so fish tissue data from previous cycles has been reassessed with the new objective to create updated lines of evidence. LOE # 47539 and LOE # 45447 are replaced by LOE # 132913 for COMM and LOE # 133059, which assesses the tissue data against the WILD objective for mercury. Zero of one samples exceed the COMM tissue objective and zero of one samples exceed the WILD tissue objective for mercury.

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 exceed the COMM tissue objective and zero of one samples exceed the WILD tissue objective and this does not exceed the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78839, Mercury
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45447
 
Pollutant: Mercury
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. The 1 sample for rainbow trout consisted of 2 composites (5 fish per composite) that were not independent and so were averaged. The results of the composites collected on the same day were averaged, per USEPA 2001, resulting in a total of one sample and zero exceedance.Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
  Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region: 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.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The USEPA 304(a) recommended water quality criterion for concentrations of methylmercury in fish tissue of trophic level 4 fish (150 - 500 mm; fillet wet weight) is 0.20 mg/kg. Total mercury is usually analyzed for most fish studies and assumed to be 100 percent methylmercury for the purposes of risk assessment (Klasing & Brodberg 2008).
Guideline Reference: Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury. Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Office of Water. EPA-823-R-01-001. January 2001
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78839, Mercury
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 133059
 
Pollutant: Mercury
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Wildlife Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 3 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 10 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Rainbow Trout each composed of 5 fish per composite).
Data Reference: Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of Wildlife Habitat comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. If trophic level 3 fish are used in the assessment then the Prey Fish Water Quality Objective must also be used to determine that the Sport Fish Objective is being met. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027.
Guideline Reference: Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy
 
Spatial Representation: Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 601PJL127.
Temporal Representation: Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2008-09-16 and 2008-09-16
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP L:akes and Reservoirs study
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78839, Mercury
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 47539
 
Pollutant: Mercury
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. Two composites (5 fish per composite) were generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
  Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region: 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.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The USEPA 304(a) recommended water quality criterion for concentrations of methylmercury in fish tissue of trophic level 4 fish (150 - 500 mm; fillet wet weight) is 0.2 mg/kg. Total mercury is usually analyzed for most fish studies and assumed to be 100 percent methylmercury for the purposes of risk assessment (Klasing & Brodberg 2008). The fish consumption rate of 32 g/day is considered more protective of human health since recommendations are now to eat one meal per week of fish to obtain necessary Omega-3 nutrition. The fish consumption rate of 32 g/day is also protective of wildlife, as it protects 6 out of 7 endangered species.
Guideline Reference: Water Quality Criterion for the Protection of Human Health: Methylmercury. Final. United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science and Technology Office of Water. EPA-823-R-01-001. January 2001
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78839, Mercury
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 132913
 
Pollutant: Mercury
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
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 SWAMP Sportfish Contamination in Lakes and Resrv data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and the results are as follows: 0 of the 1 samples exceeded the water quality standard for Mercury. This LOE contains data only for trophic level 3 fish. The concentration of Mercury in fish collected within the same calendar year, for the same trophic level were averaged into a single sample for comparison with the objective. A total of 10 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (2 composite(s) of Rainbow Trout each composed of 5 fish per composite). This LOE does not contain data from fish whos average length was outside of the legal size limits as described by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Fishing Regulations.
Data Reference: Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing beneficial comes from the Statewide Water Quality Control Plan for Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries of California, and is 0.2 mg/Kg wet weight skinless fillet samples of trophic level 3, or trophic level 4 fish (whichever is highest in the water body) over a one year averaging period. Trophic levels of applicable fish are defined in, but not limited to those in Attachment C of the Final Regulatory Language document (Appendix A) of State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2017-0027.
Guideline Reference: Inland Surface Waters, Enclosed Bays, and Estuaries Plan. Part 1: Trash Provisions; Part 2: Tribal Subsistence Beneficial Uses and Mercury Provisions; Part 3: Bacteria Provisions and Variance Policy
 
Spatial Representation: Data was collected from 1 station(s) with the station code(s): 601PJL127.
Temporal Representation: Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2008-09-16 and 2008-09-16
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP L:akes and Reservoirs study
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
102934
Region 6     
June 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 Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102934, Nitrate/Nitrite (Nitrite + Nitrate as N)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 97121
 
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 June 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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
102939
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Nitrogen
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: New Decision
Revision Status Revised
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 1 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 1 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102939, Nitrogen
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 96543
 
Pollutant: Total Nitrogen as N
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Total
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Data were collected as part of US EPA's 2012 National Lake Assessment. One integrated sample was collected in September 2011. The result was 0.435 mg/L, which exceeds the 0.3 mg/L site specific objective.
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 site specific objective for total nitrogen as N in June Lake, as referenced in the Lahontan Basin Plan table 3-16, is an annual average of 0.3 mg/L.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline:
Guideline Reference:
 
Spatial Representation: Data were collected from one location at June Lake, site 601PJL127.
Temporal Representation: One data point was collected on one day in September 2011.
Environmental Conditions: June Lake is a sub-alpine lake within the Inyo National Forest, in Mono County, eastern California. It is at an elevation of 7,621 ft (2,323 m) in the Eastern Sierra Nevada and is predominately fed by snow-melt from the surrounding mountains.
QAPP Information: Data were collected in accordance with the 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan  
QAPP Information Reference(s): 2012 National Lakes Assessment Quality Assurance Project Plan
 
 
DECISION ID
102935
Region 6     
June 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 Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102935, Nitrogen, Nitrate
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 98815
 
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 June 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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
102936
Region 6     
June 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 Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102936, Nitrogen, Nitrite
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 97859
 
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 June 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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
102937
Region 6     
June 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 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, one which evaluates data for the AG beneficial use and one which evaluates data for the MUN beneficial use, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective for the AG beneficial use; 1 of 1 samples exceed the objective for the MUN beneficial use.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples for the AG beneficial use assessment and 1 of 1 samples for the MUN beneficial use assessment exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples per beneficial use assessed are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102937, Sodium
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 97848
 
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 June 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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 102937, Sodium
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 97033
 
Pollutant: Sodium
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Water
Matrix: Water
Fraction: Dissolved
 
Beneficial Use: Municipal & Domestic Supply
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 1
 
Data and Information Type: PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed EPA National Lakes Assessment 2012 data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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
102938
Region 6     
June 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 Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. 0 of 1 samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used does not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. 0 of 1 samples exceeded the objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2.
4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 102938, Sulfates
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 97870
 
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 June 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) (601PJL127)
Temporal Representation: The samples were collected between the dates of 2012-09-11 and 2012-09-11
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
73778
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Aldrin
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the sample exceeds the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the sample exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 73778, Aldrin
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45434
 
Pollutant: Aldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Aldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
78673
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Chlordane
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the two samples exceeded the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78673, Chlordane
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45432
 
Pollutant: Chlordane
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. One sample composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total chlordane in fish tissue is 3.9 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78673, Chlordane
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45431
 
Pollutant: Chlordane
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. One sample composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Chlordane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
78891
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the two samples exceeded the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78891, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45439
 
Pollutant: Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. One sample composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total DDT concentration of 1000 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78891, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45440
 
Pollutant: Total DDT (sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. One sample composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for total DDT in fish tissue is 15 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. Samples were collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
78735
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy to determine whether the one sample exceeded the water quality objective or not.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline, however, one sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy to determine whether the one sample exceeded the water quality objective or not. Also this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78735, Dieldrin
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45446
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for dieldrin in fish tissue is 0.32 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78735, Dieldrin
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45445
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Dieldrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
78736
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Endrin
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the two samples exceeded the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78736, Endrin
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45424
 
Pollutant: Endrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endrin in fish tissue is 660 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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
Guideline Reference: Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78736, Endrin
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45423
 
Pollutant: Endrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Endrin concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
79197
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the sample exceeds the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the sample exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79197, Heptachlor
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45436
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
79196
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor epoxide
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy to determine whether the one sample exceeded the water quality objective or not.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline, however, one sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy to determine whether the one sample exceeded the water quality objective or not. Also this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79196, Heptachlor epoxide
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45442
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for heptachlor epoxide in fish tissue is 0.93 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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
Guideline Reference: Public Health Goal for Heptachlor and Heptachlor Epoxide in Drinking Water
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79196, Heptachlor epoxide
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45441
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Heptachlor Epoxide concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
79251
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the sample exceeds the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the sample exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79251, Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45429
 
Pollutant: Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Hexachlorobenzene. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for hexachlorobenzene in fish tissue is 2.8 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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
Guideline Reference: Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
79250
Region 6     
June Lake
 
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: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the two samples exceeded the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79250, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45430
 
Pollutant: Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Lindane concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79250, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45435
 
Pollutant: Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for lindane in fish tissue is 4.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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
Guideline Reference: Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
78890
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: Mirex
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. The single sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy to determine if the sample exceeds the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the sample exceeded the guideline and this sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to Section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78890, Mirex
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45448
 
Pollutant: Mirex
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Commercial or recreational collection of fish, shellfish, or organisms
 
Number of Samples: 0
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). One sample was not used in the assessment because the laboratory data reporting limit(s) was above the objective and therefore the results could not be quantified with the level of certainty required by the Listing Policy.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for mirex in fish tissue is 0.28 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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
Guideline Reference: Expedited Cancer Potency Values and Proposed Regulatory Levels for Certain Proposition 65 Carcinogens.
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
79761
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the two samples exceeded the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79761, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45426
 
Pollutant: PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total PCB was assessed for as follows: PCB aroclors and congeners were summed separately and the sum that yielded the highest value was used for the assessment.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region: 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.
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for polychlorinated biphenyls in fish tissue is 2.6 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day for a 30 year exposure over a 70-year lifetime. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79761, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45425
 
Pollutant: PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009). Total PCB was assessed for as follows: PCB aroclors and congeners were summed separately and the sum that yielded the highest value was used for the assessment.
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total PCB concentration of 500 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
 
DECISION ID
77994
Region 6     
June Lake
 
Pollutant: alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)
Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016)
Revision Status Original
Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: Pollutant
 
Regional Board Conclusion: This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence, one each to evaluate the COLD and COMM beneficial uses, are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the two samples exceeded the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used do not satisfy the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of the two samples exceeded the guideline and the sample size is insufficient to determine with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy if standards are not met. A minimum of 16 samples is needed for application of table 3.1.
4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met.
 
Regional Board Decision Recommendation: This region was not assessed this cycle. All decisions have been carried over from the previous cycle and remain the same.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation: After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board.
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77994, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45451
 
Pollutant: alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Cold Freshwater Habitat
 
Number of Samples: 1
Number of Exceedances: 0
 
Data and Information Type: Fish tissue analysis
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum total Endosulfan concentration of 100 ug/Kg (wet weight) in tissue samples for protection of aquatic life from bioaccumulation of toxic substances.
Guideline Reference: National Academy of Sciences. Water Quality Criteria 1972. EPA-R3-73-033. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 77994, alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
Region 6     
June Lake
 
LOE ID: 45452
 
Pollutant: alpha-Endosulfan (Endosulfan 1)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
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 Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for June Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 1 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan I. One composite (5 fish per composite) was generated from one species: rainbow trout. Details of the compositing protocol can be found in the March 2009 report entitled: "Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Study" (SWAMP, 2009).
Data Reference: Cruise report for the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) bioaccumulation screening study in California lakes and reservoirs year two (FY 07-08). Sampling dates: April 2008 - November 2008.
  Statewide Lakes Sportfish Contamination Study 2007 2008
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs, 2007-2008: Summary Report on a Two-Year Screening Survey
  Contaminants in Fish from California Lakes and Reservoirs: Technical Report on Year One of a Two-Year Screening Survey. A Report of the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP). California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: Pesticide concentrations, individually or collectively, shall not exceed the lowest detectable levels, using the most recent detection procedures available. There shall not be an increase in pesticide concentrations found in bottom sediments. There shall be no detectable increase in bioaccumulation of pesticides in aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan, Lahontan Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Lahontan Region (as amended)
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for endosulfan (l and ll) in fish tissue is 13,000 ppb. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A cooking reduction factor of 1 is applied for skin-off fillets.
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
Guideline Reference: Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis
 
Spatial Representation: Data for this line of evidence for June Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ June Lake - 601PJL127]. One sample was collected from 1 location. Individual sample locations consisted of an area within a given waterbody from which fish tissue samples were collected. The number of sample locations per waterbody was based on the overall size of the waterbody (SWAMP, 2010). Specifics of individual sampling locations can be found in the supplemental report entitled "Cruise Report for the Surface Waters Ambient Monitoring Program (SWAMP) Bioaccumulation Screening Study in California Lakes and Reservoirs, Sampling Dates: April 2008- November 2008" (SWAMP, 2009).
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 9/16/2008.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: Samples were collected, processed, and analyzed in accordance with the methods described in Quality Assurance Project Plan "Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs." (SWAMP, 2008).
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Project Plan Screening Study of Bioaccumulation in California Lakes and Reservoirs. Moss Landing Marine Labs. Prepared for SWAMP BOG, 49 pages plus appendices and attachments