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

Supporting Information

Regional Board 7 - Colorado River Basin Region

Water Body Name: Fig Lake
Water Body ID: CAL7231000020111217103758
Water Body Type: Lake & Reservoir
 
DECISION ID
79142
Region 7     
Fig 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 section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Three lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective. LOE 46887 was re-assessed using the new objective and was not included in the final use rating.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of one fish tissue samples exceeded the Statewide Sport Fish Water Quality Objective for the protection of the Commercial and Sport Fishing.

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: 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 79142, Mercury
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 133252
 
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 RWB7 Monitoring data for Fig 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 9 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (3 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 3 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or indigenous aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Includes amendments effective on or before January 8, 2019)
 
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): 723FIGLAK.
Temporal Representation: Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2004-11-04 and 2004-11-04
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program  
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79142, Mercury
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46887
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Mercury. Twelve composites were generated from two species: common carp and Tilapia spp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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.
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79142, Mercury
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 132849
 
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 RWB7 Monitoring data for Fig 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 9 fish were aggregated into 1 annual averages, which consisted of 1 fish species (3 composite(s) of Common Carp each composed of 3 fish per composite).
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or indigenous aquatic life. (Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region)
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan for the Colorado River Basin Region (Includes amendments effective on or before January 8, 2019)
 
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): 723FIGLAK.
Temporal Representation: Data for this line of evidence were collected between 2004-11-04 and 2004-11-04
Environmental Conditions:
QAPP Information: Quality Assurance Program Plan and Standard Operating Procedures for SWAMP program  
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78429
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue sample exceeded the NAS fish tissue evaluation 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78429, Aldrin
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45958
 
Pollutant: Aldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Aldrin. Six composites (3 fish per cpmposite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78679
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
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 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Twelve samples were collected, but 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.
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 78679, Arsenic
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46870
 
Pollutant: Arsenic
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: Not Specified
Data Used to Assess Water Quality: Water Board staff assessed SWAMP data for Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Arsenic. Twelve composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Twelve samples were 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for arsenic in fish tissue is 0.0034 ppm. 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. It is assumed that 10% of the total arsenic is present as inorganic arsenic. This constituent is a carcinogen therefore the risk level is set to one in a million.
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
79451
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue sample exceeded the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goal 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79451, Cadmium
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46891
 
Pollutant: Cadmium
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Cadmium. Twelve composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for cadmium in fish tissue is 2.2 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day.
Guideline Reference: Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for Use In Fish Advisories Volume 1: Fish Sampling and Analysis
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78680
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded either the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goals or the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78680, Chlordane
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45959
 
Pollutant: Chlordane
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78680, Chlordane
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46871
 
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: 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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlordane, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Total chlordane was calculated as the sum of the following chlordane isomers: cis- and trans-chlordane, cis- and trans-nonachlor, and oxychlordane. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78804
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Chlorpyrifos
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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue sample exceeded the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goal 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78804, Chlorpyrifos
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46878
 
Pollutant: Chlorpyrifos
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Chlorpyrifos. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for chlorpyrifos 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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78913
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded either the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goals or the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78913, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45967
 
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: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78913, DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46879
 
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: 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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for DDT, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Total DDT was calculated as the sum of 4,4'- and 2,4'- isomers of DDT, DDE, and DDD. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy..
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78805
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue sample exceeded the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goal 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78805, Diazinon
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46880
 
Pollutant: Diazinon
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Diazinon. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for diazinon in fish tissue is 1,500 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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
79141
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79141, Dieldrin
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46881
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Six composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Six samples were 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79141, Dieldrin
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45968
 
Pollutant: Dieldrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Dieldrin. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78910
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Endosulfan
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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded either the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goals or the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78910, Endosulfan
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45969
 
Pollutant: Endosulfan
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Total endosulfan was calculated as the sum of endosulfan l and endosulfan ll. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78910, Endosulfan
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46882
 
Pollutant: Endosulfan
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endosulfan, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Total endosulfan was calculated as the sum of endosulfan l and endosulfan ll. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78911
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded either the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goals or the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78911, Endrin
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45970
 
Pollutant: Endrin
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78911, Endrin
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46883
 
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: 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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Endrin. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
79550
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue sample exceeded the NAS fish tissue evaluation 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79550, Heptachlor
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45979
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78863
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78863, Heptachlor epoxide
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46885
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. Six composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Six samples were 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78863, Heptachlor epoxide
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45980
 
Pollutant: Heptachlor epoxide
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Heptachlor epoxide. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78909
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue sample exceeded the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goal 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78909, Hexachlorobenzene/ HCB
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46886
 
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: 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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Hexachlorobenzene. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78862
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded either the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goals or the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78862, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46884
 
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: 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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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: Air Toxics Hotspots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. Part ll Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values.
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78862, Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45978
 
Pollutant: Lindane/gamma Hexachlorocyclohexane (gamma-HCH)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for HCH, gamma. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
80250
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. Six fish tissue samples were collected, but 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.
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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 80250, Mirex
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46888
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Mirex. Six composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Six samples were 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78912
Region 7     
Fig 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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded either the modified OEHHA fish contaminant goals or the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78912, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46889
 
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: 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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites were averaged for species collected at the same time and location. 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78912, PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45981
 
Pollutant: PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyls)
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for PCB, Total. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites were averaged for species collected at the same time and location. 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
78864
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Selenium
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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

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

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded the OEHHA fish contaminant goal 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 78864, Selenium
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46890
 
Pollutant: Selenium
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Selenium. Twelve composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances in concentrations which are toxic to, or which produce detrimental physiological responses in, human, plant, animal, or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: The OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for selenium in fish tissue is 7.4 ppm. This screening level assumes an average body weight of 70 kg and a consumption rate of 32 g/day. A background dietary consumption rate of 0.114 mg/day is applied for this micronutrient.
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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
 
DECISION ID
79863
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
Pollutant: Toxaphene
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: Regional Board Conclusion:

The pollutant was considered for placement on the section 303(d) list in a previous cycle.

No new information was reviewed for this current assessment cycle. Therefore, the previous conclusion remains unchanged, and is as follows:

This pollutant is being considered for placement on the section 303(d) list under section 3.5 of the Listing Policy. Under this section a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.

Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. None of the samples exceed the water quality objective.

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

This conclusion is based on the staff findings that:
1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.
2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.
3. None of two fish tissue samples exceeded the NAS fish tissue 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 is a decision previously approved by the State Water Resources Control Board and the USEPA. No new data were assessed by the Regional Board for the current cycle. The decision has not changed.
 
State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation:
 
State Board Decision Recommendation:
 
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79863, Toxaphene
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 46892
 
Pollutant: Toxaphene
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 0 samples exceed the criterion for Toxaphene. Six composites were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites comprised of 1 fish per composite for Tilapia spp. and 3 fish per composite for common carp. Six samples were 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: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: The modified OEHHA Fish Contaminant Goal for toxaphene in fish tissue is 4.3 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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK].
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)
 
Line of Evidence (LOE) for Decision ID 79863, Toxaphene
Region 7     
Fig Lake
 
LOE ID: 45989
 
Pollutant: Toxaphene
LOE Subgroup: Pollutant-Tissue
Matrix: Tissue
Fraction: Fish fillet
 
Beneficial Use: Warm Freshwater Habitat
 
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 Fig Lake to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 2 samples exceed the criterion for Toxaphene. Six composites (3 fish per composite) were generated from two species: Tilapia spp. and common carp. Composites collected at the same time on the same day for the same species were averaged in accordance with the listing policy.
Data Reference: RWB7 Fish Tissue Study 2004
 
SWAMP Data: SWAMP
 
Water Quality Objective/Criterion: No individual chemical or combination of chemicals shall be present in concentrations that adversely affect beneficial uses. There shall be no increase in hazardous chemical concentrations found in bottom sediments or aquatic life (Water Quality Control Plan, Colorado River Basin).
Objective/Criterion Reference: Water Quality Control Plan Colorado River Basin, with amendments adopted through June 2006
 
Evaluation Guideline: National Academy of Science guidelines (NAS 1972) establish a maximum Toxaphene 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 Fig Lake was collected at 1 monitoring site [ Fig Lake - 723FIGLAK]
Temporal Representation: Data was collected on a single day 11/4/2004.
Environmental Conditions: Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data.
QAPP Information: The SWAMP QAPP (2002) was followed.
QAPP Information Reference(s): Quality Assurance Management Plan for the State of California's Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program. Sacramento, CA. State Water Resources Control Board. SWAMP. December 2002 (1st version)