WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE (2019)
Tribal code
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE
WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN
FOR WALKER RIVER AND WEBER RESERVOIR
Prepared for
WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE
#2 Hospital Road
Schurz, NV 89427
(775) 773-2002
Contact: Ms. Gina Wachsmuth
Prepared by
Lori Carpenter, PWS CPESC
Consulting Scientist
PO Box 19805
Reno, Nevada 89521
(775) 287-9038
loric@nevada.unr.edu
Contact: Ms. Lori Carpenter, PWS, CPESC
Hydrologist/Hydrogeologist
January 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -11.1
Location. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -11.2
Regulatory Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -1-
2.0
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR THE WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -22.1
Waters Requiring Water Quality Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -22.2
Determining Beneficial Uses/Designated Uses.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -32.3
Adopting Water Quality Criteria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -42.3.1 General Numeric Criteria.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -42.3.2 General Narrative Criteria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -42.3.3 Aquatic Life Criteria, Human Health Criteria, Recreational Water Quality
Criteria Toxic Metals and Organic Compounds Pollutants Criteria. . . . -42.3.4 Control Reaches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -52.3.5 Parameters of Primary Concern (PPCs).. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -62.4
Antidegradation Policy and Implementation Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -62.4.1 Antidegradation Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -62.4.2 Antidegradation Implementation Methods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -72.5
Additional Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -112.6
Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -11-
3.0
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -14-
4.0
REFERENCES.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -15-
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-ii-
ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT 1 - Figures
Fig. 1 - Site Location Map
Fig. 2 - Walker River Basin Map
Fig. 3 - Surface Water Monitoring Sites Location Map
ATTACHMENT 2 - Tables
Table 1. Beneficial Uses/Designated Uses, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute
Tribe
Table 2a. Standards of Water Quality - Walker River, Reaches B and D
Table 2b. Standards of Water Quality - Walker River, Reach C
Table 2c. Standards of Water Quality - Walker River, Reach E
Table 2d. Rationale of Standards
Table 3. Narrative Water Quality Standards,Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute
Tribe
Table 4. Aquatic Life Criteria Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Table 4a: Conversion Factors for Dissolved Metals
Table 4b: Parameters for Calculating Freshwater Dissolved Metals Criteria That Are
Hardness-Dependent
Table 5. Copper Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 6. Selenium Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 7. Ammonia Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Table 9. Recreational Water Quality Criteria, Walker River Paiute Tribe
This report should be cited as: WRPT, 2018, Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control
Plan for Walker River and Weber Reservoir, 10 pages with 2 attachments.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-iii-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
1.0
INTRODUCTION
This Water Quality Control Plan (WQCP) has been prepared by Huffman & Carpenter, Inc. (H&C)
on behalf of the Walker River Paiute Tribe (WRPT, or the “Tribe”). The WQCP is for the Walker
River Indian Reservation located in Churchill, Lyon and Mineral Countries, Nevada (Attachment
1, Figure 1).
1.1
Location
The Reservation is located in west central Nevada. The land base is 323,407 acres or approximately
550 square miles. The primary source of surface water that flows through the Reservation is the
Walker River (Attachment 1, Figure 2). The headwaters of the system arise in the Sierra Nevada
range in Mono County, California. The headwaters of the river begin as two main forks, the West
Walker River and the East Walker River, which join together south of Yerington, Nevada. After the
confluence of the east and west forks, the Walker River flows north through Mason Valley and the
Yerington area. Shortly after passing through the Mason Valley Wildlife Management Area, where
it is augmented by flows from several irrigations return ditches and sloughs, the Walker River turns
generally eastward and continues on to the Reservation. On the Reservation, it flows first east and
then southeast through Campbell Valley to Weber Dam, forming Weber Reservoir. From Weber
Reservoir it flows south-southeast into Walker Lake, the terminal sink of the basin.
1.2
Regulatory Background
In order for the WQCP and the Tribal Water Quality Standards (WQS) to become applicable under
the Clean Water Act, (a) EPA must have found the tribe eligible to be treated in a manner similar
to a state under section 518 of the Act for the purposes of administering a section 303(c) WQS
program,
The WRPT Treatment As A State Appication was granted on March 2, 2016.
(b) the tribe must adopt the WQS pursuant to tribal law and submit them to EPA in accordance with
40 CFR part 131, and
The WRPT WQS were approved pursuant to tribal law on ______________, 2018 and submitted
to EPA on ______________________, 2018.
(c) EPA must approve the submitted WQS in accordance with part 131 and Clean Water Act section
303(c).
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-1-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
2.0
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR THE WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE
This WQCP describes proposed water quality standards for the Walker River Indian Reservation
(Attachment 1, Figure 1) including beneficial/designated uses, water quality criteria, and an
Antidegradation Policy. These standards were developed using the EPA model for water quality
standards template for waters on Indian reservations. Tribal water quality data collected from the
WRPT water quality monitoring program was also reviewed. The overall purpose of these standards
is to protect the Beneficial Uses of the Walker River and Weber Reservoir as it flows through Tribal
lands and discharges to Walker Lake adjacent to and downstream of Tribal lands (Attachment 1,
Figure 2).
The WRPT Water Quality Standards apply to all reservation waters and the Beneficial
Uses/Designated Uses. The following benfeficial uses/designated uses apply to all waters and reflect
the uses specified in section 101(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act. Since 1983, EPA's WQS regulation
at 40 CFR 131.10 which has interpreted and implemented the Clean Water Act through requirements
that WQS protect these uses. The WRPT WQS provide for and accomplish the following objectives:
(1) the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife;
(2) recreation in and on the water;
(3) cultural and traditional uses of the reservation waters; and
(4) use of the water as a public water supply, excluding saline waters.
The application of Tribal water quality standards will be a continual process. At least once every
three to five years, the WRPT must review its water quality standards and, if appropriate, revise the
standards. The WRPT may change its approach for establishing standards in subsequent reviews.
For example, WRPT WQS standards could be developed using Tribal water quality data collected
from the WRPT water quality monitoring program, and other published literature and data from the
the USEPA. The overall purpose of all WQS standards is to protect the Beneficial/Designated Uses
of the Walker River and Weber Reservoir as it flows through Tribal lands and discharges to Walker
Lake.
The recommended water quality standards in this WQCP are a culmination of many years of Tribal
activities designed to investigate and protect water quality. These activities demonstrate the Tribe’s
management experience, and the technical and administrative capabilities of the staff to administer
and manage the water quality program.
2.1
Waters Requiring Water Quality Standards
The first step in developing water quality standards is to identify “waters of the United States”.
These “waters of the United States” are naturally occurring surface waters, and they are required to
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-2-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
have water quality standards. Artificially-created waters may also be designated to have water
quality standards. The need to develop water quality standards for artificially-created waters is
determined by the USEPA and the Tribe on a case-by-case basis. These man-made surface waters
may be enhanced with the adoption of water quality standards (USEPA, 1990).
The waters requiring water quality standards on the Reservation are the free-flowing Walker River
from where it enters the Reservation (at the northwestern boundary of the Reservation) to the inlet
to Weber Reservoir; and from Weber Reservoir and to the inlet to Walker Lake. In addition, the
WRPT proposes water quality standards for the man-made water body Weber Reservoir. Therefore,
the WRPT proposes water quality standards for four reaches within the Reservation on the Walker
River called Reaches B, C, D and E:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Reach B - Walker River at Reservation Boundary to Weber Reservoir (WR-01, WR-02,
WR-05 TO WB-01);
Reach C - Weber Reservoir (WB-01);
Reach D - Weber Reservoir (WB-01) along Walker River through WR-06, WR-08, to
Location WR-10 Walker River; and,
Reach E, Walker River WR-10 to WR-12.
These four reaches are essentially part of one interconnected continuous river system. (Attachment
2, Tables 2a, 2b and 2c).
2.2
Determining Beneficial Uses/Designated Uses
According to the USEPA (USEPA, 1990), each Indian Tribe must develop a use classification
system that describes the uses of water bodies to be protected. At a minimum, water quality
standards must provide for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife, and for
recreation in and on the water.
The WRPT employs a Beneficial Use system to classify the uses of the Walker River on the
Reservation and Weber Reservoir. The Beneficial Uses are summarized on Attachment 2, Table
1. The applicability of the Beneficial Uses to each of the four reaches are listed in Attachment 2,
Tables 2a, 2b, 2c. The Beneficial Uses described in these tables is the best estimate by the Tribe of
the current and probable future uses of the water bodies. Please note that these Beneficial Uses are
for surface water only and do not include groundwater.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-3-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
2.3
Adopting Water Quality Criteria
The WRPT proposes water quality criteria based site-specific conditions and USEPA-recommended
water quality criteria. Both narrative and numeric criteria are proposed by the WRPT for the four
reaches on the Reservation (i.e., Reach B, Reach C, Reach D and Reach E). Attachment 2, Table
2d lists rationale for water quality standards.
2.3.1 General Numeric Criteria
General numeric criteria for the four reaches on the Reservation are listed in Attachment 2, Tables
2a, 2b, 2c and 2d. The numeric criteria differ slightly between Reach B and D (Walker River at the
Reservation Boundary, up and downstream of Weber Reservoir) and Reach C (Weber Reservoir)
versus Reach E (inflow to Walker lake).
2.3.2 General Narrative Criteria
General narrative criteria for the four reaches on the Reservation are listed in Attachment 2, Table
3. These criteria are the same for all four reaches.
2.3.3 Aquatic Life Criteria, Human Health Criteria, Recreational Water Quality Criteria
Toxic Metals and Organic Compounds Pollutants Criteria
Toxic metals and organic compounds numeric criteria for the four reaches on the Reservation are
listed in Attachment 2, Tables 4a, 4b, 4c through 9, respectively. These criteria are the same for all
four reaches.
(1) Aquatic life criteria. The aquatic life criteria for these water quality standards are contained in
Tables 4a, 4b, 4c through 7 of this section. The aquatic life criteria apply as follows:
i.
The aquatic life criteria in Tables Tables 4a, 4b, 4c through 7 of this section apply to all
waters designated for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wild life.
(2) Human Health Criteria. The human health criteria for these water quality standards are
contained in Table 8 and are a cancer risk of 10-6 and fish consumption level of 22 grams/day.
i.
The human health criteria for carcinogens in Table 8 was also based on an excess lifetime
cancer risk level of 10-6 (one in a million).
ii.
The human health criteria in these standards were calculated using a fish consumption rate
of 22 grams per day (gpd) (Table 8).
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-4-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
iii. For all waters with the designated use specified domestic and municipal supply (public water
supply) use, the human health criteria for "Water Plus Organisms" as presented in Table 8 apply.
iv. For all waters with the designated use aquatic life (protection and propagation of fish, shellfish,
and wildlife), but without the designated use domestic and municipal supply (public water supply),
the human health criteria for "Organisms Only" as presented in Table 8 apply.
(3) Recreational water quality criteria. For all waters with the designated use recreation in and on
the water, the criteria in Column A of Table 9 shall apply.
2.3.4 Control Reaches
Criteria have been developed for water quality parameters of primary concern (PPCs) at four Control
Reaches at the Reservation. At least one Control Reach is proposed for each of the four reaches on
the Reservation (i.e., the Walker River above Weber Reservoir, Weber Reservoir, and the Walker
River below Weber Reservoir). These four Control Reaches are shown on Attachment 1, Figure 3,
and listed below.
Therefore, the WRPT proposes water quality standards for four reaches within the Reservation on
the Walker River called Reaches B, C, D and E:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Control Reach B - Walker River at Reservation Boundary to Weber Reservoir (WR-01,
WR-02, WR-05 TO WB-01);
Control Reach C - Weber Reservoir (WB-01);
Control Reach D - Weber Reservoir (WB-01) along Walker River through WR-06, WR-08,
to Location WR-10 Walker River; and,
Control Reach E, Walker River WR-10 to WR-12.
These four reaches are essentially part of one interconnected continuous river system. (Attachment
2, Tables 2a, 2b and 2c).
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-5-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
2.3.5 Parameters of Primary Concern (PPCs)
The WRPT proposes water quality criteria based on USEPA-recommended water quality criteria.
Other site-specific data have been collected by the WRPT.
The identified water quality standards for beneficial uses include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Temperature
pH
Dissolved Oxygen
Total Phosphorus
Nitrogen Species (Nitrate and Nitrite)
Suspended Solids
Turbidity
Color
Total Dissolved Solids
Chloride
Sulfate
E coli
2.4
Antidegradation Policy and Implementation Methods
2.4.1 Antidegradation Policy
(1) Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses
shall be maintained and protected.
(2) Where the quality of the waters exceeds levels necessary to support the protection and
propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be
maintained and protected unless the WRPT finds, after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental
coordination and public participation provisions, that allowing lower water quality is necessary to
accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located.
In allowing such degradation or lower water quality, the WRPT shall assure water quality adequate
to protect existing uses fully. Further, the WRPT shall assure that there shall be achieved the highest
statutory and regulatory requirements for all new and existing point sources and all cost-effective
and reasonable best management practices for nonpoint source control.
(i) Identification of reservation waters for the protections described in paragraph (2) of this section
will be made on a parameter-by-parameter basis.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-6-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
(ii) Before allowing any lowering of high water quality, pursuant to paragraph (2) of this section, the
Tribe shall find, after an analysis of alternatives, that such a lowering is necessary to accommodate
important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located. The analysis
of alternatives shall evaluate a range of practicable alternatives that would prevent or lessen the
degradation associated with the proposed activity. When the analysis of alternatives identifies one
or more practicable alternatives, the Tribe shall only find that a lowering is necessary if one such
alternative is selected for implementation.
(3) Where high quality waters constitute an outstanding National resource, such as waters of
National, State, and Tribal parks and wildlife refuges and waters of exceptional recreational or
ecological significance, that water quality shall be maintained and protected.
(4) In those cases where potential water quality impairment associated with a thermal discharge is
involved, the decision to allow such degradation shall be consistent with section 316 of the Clean
Water Act.
2.4.2 Antidegradation Implementation Methods
(A) Aantidegradation Implementation Methods:
(1) Scope and Applicability. The antidegradation policy in Section 2.4.1 and these antidegradation
implementation methods shall be applied to all reservation waters of the United States included in
Section 2.1.
(i) All waters receive protection for existing instream uses consistent with Section 2.4.1(1).
(ii) High quality water protection consistent with Section 2.4.1(2) will be identified on a
parameter-by-parameter basis. Each parameter for which water quality would be lowered by the
regulated activity shall be considered and evaluated independently consistent with Section 2.4.2(3).
The WRPT is not expected to maintain a list of waters receiving protection consistent with Section
2.4.1(2).
(iii) Waters provided protection as an Outstanding National Resource Water consistent with Section
2.4.1(3) will be identified following the process outlined in Section 2.4.2(4) and a comprehensive
list shall be maintained by the WRPT.
(iv) The requirements of Section 2.4.1(2) will be triggered by all new or expanded regulated
activities. Regulated activities include, but are not limited to, any activity that requires a permit,
license or water quality certification pursuant to section 402 of the Act, section 404 of the Act, and
section 401 of the Act.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-7-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
Note: The WRPT will coordinate with the EPA Regional Office to amend the antidegradation
implementation methods because the WRPT does not yet have the authority to administer the CWA
section 402 permitting program. However, no lowering of a high quality water shall be allowed
unless the WRPT makes the finding consistent with Section 2.4.2(3)(ii) and the lowering is
authorized in a permit.
(v) Antidegradation protections will be addressed in new or reissued general permits authorized,
implemented, or administered by the permitting authority either at the time the permitting authority
develops and issues the general permit or upon review of an applicant's request to be covered by a
general permit. The permitting authority will describe in writing in the permit fact sheet how the
general permit is consistent with the antidegradation requirements of this paragraph and the
antidegradation policy in Section 2.4.1.
(2) Existing Instream Use Protection consistent with Section 2.4.1(1). For all waters, the WRPT shall
ensure that the level of water quality necessary to protect existing uses is maintained. In order to
achieve this requirement, the WRPT shall consider whether a discharge would lower the water
quality to the extent that it would no longer be sufficient to protect and maintain the existing uses
of that water body. Such consideration shall be based on all existing and readily available water
quality-related data and information, as well as any additional water-quality related data and
information submitted during the public comment period for the permit or license.
(3) High Quality Water Protection consistent with Section 2.4.1(2). High quality waters are water
bodies in which, on a parameter-by-parameter basis, the quality of the waters exceeds levels
necessary to support protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and
on the water. The WRPT shall ensure that no action resulting in a lowering of water quality occurs
unless the components outlined in Section 2.4.2(3)(i) are available to the WRPT and found to
adequately support the lowering of water quality as necessary to accommodate important economic
and social development in the area in which the water is located consistent with Section 2.4.2(3)(ii).
(i) When seeking to lower water quality for one or more parameters that exceeds levels necessary
to support the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the
water, the WRPT will consider the following components and information:
(1) Identifying Information. Name of the applicant, a description of the nature of the applicant's
business and the pollutants to be discharged, location of the discharge, the name of and any water
quality data for the receiving water body, daily maximum and average flow to be discharged, and
effluent characterization.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-8-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
(2) Analysis of alternatives. Identification and evaluation of a range of practicable alternatives that
would prevent or lessen the degradation associated with the proposed activity to determine whether
the degradation of water quality is necessary. When the analysis of alternatives identifies one or more
practicable alternatives, the WRPT shall only find that a lowering is necessary, consistent with
Section 2.4.2(3)(ii), if one such alternative is selected for implementation.
(3) Socio-economic analysis. Identification and evaluation of the social and economic development
benefits to the area in which the waters are located that will be foregone if the lowering of water
quality is not allowed. Along with the analysis of alternatives, the socio-economic analysis is used
to determine whether the lowering of water quality will accommodate important economic and social
development in the area in which the water is located. The "area in which the waters are located"
shall be determined on a case-by-case basis, and shall include all areas directly impacted by the
proposed regulated activity. Factors that must be considered in the socio-economic analysis include,
but are not limited to, the ecological and economic importance of the affected waters, identification
of the least-cost method needed to prevent degradation, the importance of the development to the
affected community, the identity and socio-economic health of the affected community as
determined by appropriate analytical methods, and identification of a range of practicable
alternatives that could prevent or lessen degradation while allowing the important development to
occur.
(4) Any additional documentation requested by the WRPT which, in the judgment of the WRPT, is
needed to decide whether to find that a lowering of water quality is necessary to accommodate
important economic and social development in the area in which the water is located.
(ii) Once the WRPT has the components and information required in Section 2.4.2(3)(i), the WRPT
shall use that information to make a finding as to whether the lowering of water quality is necessary
to accommodate important social and economic development in the area in which the water is
located.
(1) If the proposed lowering of water quality is either not necessary, or not important to
accommodate social and economic development, the WRPT shall deny the request to lower water
quality.
(2) If the lowering of water quality is necessary, and will accommodate important social and
economic development goals, the WRPT may allow a lowering to the high quality water as long as
one of the alternatives identified in Section 2.4.2(3)(i)(2) is selected for implementation. If a
non-degrading practicable alternative is selected, no lowering in the high quality water will occur,
and the WRPT does not need to authorize the lowering.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-9-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
(3) In no event may the decision reached under this section allow water quality to be lowered below
the level required to support existing and designated uses.
(4) The WRPT's decision to allow a lowering of water quality shall be subject to applicable public
participation requirements. Any reports, documents and data relevant to the discussion at the public
hearing shall be available at least thirty days before the hearing. To the extent possible, public notice
regarding the finding to allow a lowering of water quality will be coordinated with other required
notices for public review.
(5) In allowing any degradation of water quality, the WRPT must assure that there shall be achieved
in the watershed the highest statutory and regulatory requirements for all new and existing point
sources and cost-effective and reasonable best management practices for nonpoint source controls.
(4) Outstanding National Resource Water Protection consistent with Section 2.4.1(3). Any interested
party may nominate a specific reservation water to be assigned as an Outstanding National Resource
Water and the WRPT will make the final decision to assign the water as an Outstanding National
Resource Water. Such nomination shall include written documentation of the qualifications of the
reservation water that warrant Outstanding National Resource Water protection.
(i) The WRPT's decision to assign a water as an Outstanding National Resource Water shall be
subject to applicable public participation requirements. Any data and information relevant to the
decision shall be available at least thirty days before the hearing. To the extent possible, public notice
regarding the decision to assign a reservation water as an Outstanding National Resource Water will
be coordinated with other required notices for public review.
(ii) The WRPT will maintain a comprehensive list of the reservation waters in their Regions that
have been assigned as an Outstanding National Resource Water consistent with Section 2.4.2(4)(i).
(iii) For reservation waters assigned as Outstanding National Resource Waters consistent with
Section 2.4.2(4)(i), the WRPT shall ensure, through the application of appropriate controls on point
and nonpoint pollutant sources, that water quality is maintained and protected. No new or expanded
point source discharges will be allowed to Outstanding National Resource Waters, and no new or
expanded point source discharges to tributaries to Outstanding National Resource Waters that would
result in lower water quality in the Outstanding National Resource Waters will be allowed. The
WRPT intends to allow short-term, temporary degradation in an Outstanding National Resource
Water as long as the short-term, temporary degradation is limited to the shortest possible time in the
context of weeks to months, does not impact existing uses, and does not alter the essential or special
characteristics that make the reservation water an Outstanding National Resource Water.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-10-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
2.5
Additional Information
It is recognized that natural conditions in both the Walker River on the Reservation and Weber
Reservoir may, on occasion, be outside the limits established by the water quality standards. The
WRPT acknowledges that water quality standards will not necessarily be considered violated when
natural conditions cause criteria to be outside the established limits (these may be the result of
natural physical, chemical and/or biological conditions). Exceedances of water quality standards will
be considered on a case-by-case basis to determine the relative contribution of natural conditions and
anthropogenic pollutant loading.
It is also understood that the magnitude of water flow in the lower Walker River and water elevation
in Walker Lake are inexorably linked to water quality and protection of beneficial uses of both the
river and the lake. If, using a combination of evaluation tools, it is concluded that an overall benefit
to the Lake or River can be achieved by increased flow, the WRPT can make accommodations for
a temporary condition in which existing water quality may be lowered (i.e., the WRPT may
temporarily relax its Antidegradation Policy). The evaluation tools may include (but may not be
limited to) water quality models, focused research, monitoring data, and scientific discretion. A
similar approach may be applied for any specific water quality criteria. In cases where potential
water quality impairments associated with thermal discharge are involved, the Antidegradation
Policy and its implementation shall be consistent with Section 316 of the CWA, as amended (33
U.S.C. Section 1326 (1987)).
2.6
Implementation
The WRPT’s Water Resources Department (WRD), acting under authority delegated by the Tribal
Council of the Walker River Paiute Tribe, shall implement the WRPT’s water quality standards for
the Walker River Indian Reservation. Implementation will include adherence to the Antidegradation
Policy and be accomplished by establishing and maintaining controls on the discharge of pollutants
into surface waters. The WRD will also work in close cooperation with local, State and Federal
agencies towards the goal of controlling regional discharges including nonpoint source pollution.
Habitat restoration will be an important component of the implementation efforts. The WRD,
working with the Tribal Council, shall do the following.
Monitoring and Assessment
1.
Monitor water quality to assess the effectiveness of pollution controls and to determine
whether water quality standards are being attained. While emphasis will continue to be
placed on chemical based monitoring, additional biological indicators of water quality and
ecosystem health may be developed.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-11-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
2.
Review adequacy of existing data base and obtain additional data when required. The WRPT
will promote an active program to: better define the scientific understanding upon which the
water quality standards are based; obtain information as to the impacts of point and nonpoint
source discharges on receiving waters; and assist in implementation of water quality controls
and habitat restoration projects.
3.
Continue liaison with local, State and Federal monitoring and research activities, which are
currently underway regionally.
4.
Assist USEPA staff to write National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits for point source discharges to receiving waters on the Reservation.
5.
Assess the probable impact of discharges on receiving waters in light of designated uses and
numeric and narrative standards. All permits issued or reissued shall be conditioned in such
a manner as to authorize only activities that will not cause violations of Tribal water quality
standards. Permits may be subjected to modification whenever it appears to the permitting
authority that the activity violates water quality standards.
6.
Work with USEPA to develop water-quality-based effluent limitations and comments on
technology-based discharge limitations, as appropriate, for inclusion in any Federal permit
issued to a discharger pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Section
1342).
7.
Require that these water-quality-based discharge limitations be included in any such permit
as a condition for Tribal certification pursuant to Section 402 of the CWA (33 U.S.C. Section
1342).
8.
Coordinate with upstream jurisdictions to ensure that permits issued by these jurisdictions
comply with WRPT water quality standards.
9.
Advise prospective dischargers of discharge requirements.
10.
Develop and pursue inspection and enforcement programs to ensure that dischargers comply
with requirements of the WRPT water quality standards and any requirements promulgated
thereunder and to support the enforcement of Federal permits by the USEPA.
11.
May establish a schedule in a NPDES Permit to bring a source or nonpoint source into
compliance with an existing or revised water quality standard.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-12-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
Nonpoint Source Controls
12.
Encourage voluntary implementation of WRPT’s NPS Pollution Management Plan (H&C,
2001) to control nonpoint sources of pollutants to achieve compliance with the Tribal water
quality standards.
13.
Review and modify, as appropriate, best management practices established in permits,
orders, rules or directives to achieve compliance with water quality criteria.
14.
Work with local, State and Federal agencies, and private concerns to address and develop
solutions to reduce the impacts of regional agricultural activities on the Walker River.
15.
Work with local, State, and Federal agencies, and private concerns, as appropriate, to
coordinate nonpoint source control activities.
16.
Investigate the benefits of "pollution trading" as a mechanism to prevent the cumulative
increase of regional nonpoint source and point source discharges.
Wastewater
17.
Upgrade domestic wastewater treatment, as necessary, to protect and maintain beneficial uses
and existing water quality.
Education
18.
Encourage WRD staff to obtain training in the areas of watershed management, water quality
monitoring, water quality protection, riparian restoration, and other appropriate topics.
19.
Provide educational outreach to Tribal members and landowners concerning how human
activities affect pollution of receiving water bodies.
Regional Planning
20.
Participate with local, State, and Federal agencies, and private concerns in regional water
quality and riparian habitat restoration projects.
21.
Participate with local, State, and Federal agencies, and private concerns, in discussions on
regional water supply planning.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-13-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
22.
The WRPT has completed an emergency response plan that lists the actions to be taken if a
transportation accident causes a spill of harmful material to enter the Walker River.
Enforcement
23.
WRPT water quality standards shall be enforced through all methods available to the WRPT
including, but not limited to: issuance of permits by the USEPA; participation by the WRPT
in the USEPA permitting process; imposing conditions in leases of Tribal lands, rights of
way across Tribal lands and other legal documents authorizing the use of Tribal lands or
interests in Tribal lands; issuance of regulatory orders; taking court actions; review and
approval of plans and specifications; evaluation of compliance with best management
practices and all reasonable methods of prevention, control, and treatment of wastes prior to
discharge; and coordination with Tribal and non-Tribal departments and regulatory agencies.
Review
24.
In accordance with section 303 (c) of the CWA (as amended), public hearings will be held
at least once each three year period for the purpose of reviewing applicable water quality
standards and/or adopting new standards. Reviews may be held more frequently if necessary.
25.
All standards are subject to modification if new scientific data and understanding becomes
available, even if this entails an apparent “relaxation” of standards.
3.0
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Attachment 2, Tables 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d contain a summary of the water quality standards proposed
by the WRPT for the parameters of primary concern for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
within the Reservation.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-14-
Walker River Paiute Tribe Water Quality Control Plan
for the Walker River and Weber Reservoir
January 2019
4.0
REFERENCES
American Public Health Association, 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewaster. 19th edition.
USEPA, 1972. Water Quality Criteria, 1972 (Blue Book). EPA R3-373-033. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Studies Board.
USEPA, 1976. Quality Criteria for Water (Red Book). EPA 440/9-76-023. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water and Hazardous Materials.
USEPA, 1986. Quality Criteria for Water (Gold Book). EPA 440/5-86-001. US Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water Regulations and Standards.
USEPA, 2002. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria: 2002. EPA-822-R-02-047. US
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology.
USEPA, December 2016. EPA 820-D-16-003 Model Water Quality Standards Template for Water
on Indian Reservations
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Water Quality Control Plan Draft Final r2.wpd
-15-
ATTACHMENT 1 - Figures
Fig. 1 - Site Location Map
Fig. 2 - Walker River Basin Map
Fig. 3 - Surface Water Monitoring Sites Location Map
OREGON
±
IDAHO
0
6
12
£
¤Churchill County
Miles
95
Reno
UTAH
NEVADA
Walker River
Paiute Tribe
Reservation
£
¤
95A
Yerington
Schurz
R
lker
Wa
Lyon Mineral
County County
Las Vegas
ARIZONA
119°0'0"W
Detail
Map Area
118°50'0"W
£
¤
95
Walker
Lake
118°40'0"W
38°50'0"N
39°0'0"N
119°10'0"W
iver
CALIFORNIA
±
0
2
4
6
Miles
Water Quality Control Plan
Walker River Indian Reservation
I:\Projects\102-WRPT\Mapping\ArcView\Map_documents\wqcp att1 fig1 site location map rev2.mxd
Attachment 1, Figure 1
Site Location Map
GSH 3/23/2005
NEVADA
"
Reno
Walker River
Paiute Reservation
t
u
95A
Walker River Basin
t
u
95
Fresno
Las Vegas
CALIFORNIA
Churchill
County
iver
"
Walker River
Paiute Tribe
Reservation
Lyon
County
a lk e r R
"
W
Weber Reservoir
"Yerington
Douglas
County
"
r
W
est
iv e r
W
Mineral
County
rR
alke
R
e
alk
395
Ea
s
iver
tW
t
u
Schurz
Walker
Lake
"
t
u
95
Hawthorne
U
V
108
"
Bridgeport
Mono
County
t
u
NEVADA
395
CALIFORNIA
±
0
5
10
15
Water Quality Control Plan
Walker River Indian Reservation
Attachment 1, Figure 2
Walker River Basin
Miles
I:\Projects\102-WRPT\Mapping\ArcView\Map_documents\wqcp att1 fig2 walker river basin.mxd
GSH 2/23/2005
WR-02
#
0
#
0WR-01
WR-04
#
0
WR-05
#
0
WB-01
#
0
#
0WR-06
WR-08
#
0
WR-10
#
0
WR-12
#
0
Legend
#
0
WalkerRiver_SamplePoints selection
1908 Water Level
WalkerRiverPaiuteTribe_Reservation
±
0
2
WALKER RIVER PAIUTE RESERVATION
Lyon & Mineral Counties, Nevada
4
Miles
6
3
Attachment 1, Figure
Figure 2
Samping Sites Location Map
I:\Projects\102-WRPT\Mapping\ArcView\Map_documents\0930modification\wrpt att1 fig2 sampling sites location map_2.mxd
GSH 10/01/04
ATTACHMENT 2 - Tables
Table 1. Beneficial Uses/Designated Uses, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute
Tribe
Table 2a. Standards of Water Quality - Walker River, Reaches B and D
Table 2b. Standards of Water Quality - Walker River, Reach C
Table 2c. Standards of Water Quality - Walker River, Reach E
Table 2d. Rationale of Standards
Table 3. Narrative Water Quality Standards,Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute
Tribe
Table 4. Aquatic Life Criteria Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Table 4a: Conversion Factors for Dissolved Metals
Table 4b: Parameters for Calculating Freshwater Dissolved Metals Criteria That Are
Hardness-Dependent
Table 5. Copper Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 6. Selenium Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 7. Ammonia Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan,
Walker River Paiute Tribe
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Table 9. Recreational Water Quality Criteria, Walker River Paiute Tribe
ATTACHMENT 2, TABLE 1 - BENEFICIAL USES/ DESIGNATED USES
Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
Abbreviations and Definitions of Beneficial/Designated Uses
AQUL
Aquatic Life. A beneficial use designation in which the waterbody provides suitable
habitat for survival and reproduction of desirable fish, shellfish, and other aquatic
organisms.
CLTL
Cultural. For the purpose of preserving quality of water for ceremonial, traditional,
and cultural uses of the Walker River Paiute people.
DOMS
Domestic or Municipal Supply. For the purpose of community or individual water
supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water.
GRND
Groundwater Recharge. For the purpose of recharge of groundwater for future
extraction, maintenance of water quality, or other purposes.
IND
Industrial. For the purpose of industrial uses.
INST
Instream Flow. For the purpose of preserving river geomorphic feature.
IRRG
Irrigation. Beneficial uses of water for the purpose of irrigation including, but not
limited to, farming, horticulture, range and range vegetation.
LSWT
Livestock Watering. For the purpose of watering range and farm livestock.
RARE
Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species. For the purpose of supporting habitat
necessary for the survival and successful maintenance of plant or animal species
established as rare, threatened or endangered.
REC1
Recreation - Water Contact. For the purpose of recreational activities involving body
contact with water. These include, but are not limited to, swimming, wading, water
skiing, skin and SCUBA diving, wind surfing, jet skiing, fishing, and bathing.
REC2
Recreation - Water Non-contact. For the purpose of recreational activities involving
proximity to water but not normally involving body contact. These include, but are
not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beach combing, camping, boating,
hunting, sightseeing, and aesthetic enjoyment in conjunction with the above
activities.
RIPH
Riparian Habitat. For the purpose of maintaining and enhancing the growth and
survival of riparian vegetation.
WET
Wetland Habitat. For the purpose of maintaining and enhancing the growth and
survival of wetland habitat.
WILD
Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat. For the purpose of protection and propagation of
wildlife (including fish, birds and other water dependent biota), and supporting
wildlife habitat.
G:\WRPT_2018\WQ_Report WRPT 2018\Table 01 - Beneficial Uses Definitions r2 2018.wpd
Page 1 of 1
Attachment 2, Table 2a STANDARDS OF WATER QUALITY - Walker River, Reaches B and D
Walker River Reaches B, C, D and E [Reach B - Walker River at Reservation Boundary to Weber Reservoir] (WR-01, WR-02,
WR-05 TO WB-01); Reach C - Weber Reservoir (WB-01), Reach D - Weber Reservoir (WB-01) along Walker River through WR06, WR--08, to Location WR-10 Walker River, Reach E, Walker River WR-10 to WR-12]
Beneficial Uses [Reach B (WR-01, WR-02, WR-05),
Reach D (WR-06, WR-08]
Domestic or Municipal Supply
Groundwater Recharge
Industrial
Instream Flow
IrrIgation
Livestock Waterig
Recreation; Contact
Recreation; Non-Contact
Riparian Habitat
Wetland Habitat
Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
Beneficial Uses
Aquatic Life Species of Concern: LCT When Present
S.V. Nov-Mar ≤13
S.V. Apr-Jun ≤23 (A)
Temperature - °C
S.V. Jul-Oct≤28
Cultural
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR
BENEFIIAL USES
Aquatic Life
PARAMETERS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*
pH
S.V. 6.5-9.0
*
Dissolved Oxygen
S.V ≥5.0 June-Oct.
S.V.≥8.0 Nov.-May
*
S.V.≤0.05
*
Nitrite S.V. ≤5.0 (B)
*
Total Phosphorous
(as P) - mg/l
Nitrogen Species (as
N) - mg/l
Suspended Solids mg/l
Turbidity - NTU
Total Dissolved
Solids - mg/l
Chloride - mg/l
Sulfate - mg/l
E. coli - No./100 ml
*
Nitrate S.V. ≤10
S.V. ≤80
*
S.V. ≤50 (C )
*
A-Avg. ≤500
Acute ≤800 S.V. ≤230 (D)
S.V. ≤250
G.M.≤126
S.T.V. ≤410
*
*
*
*
*
Note A: S.V. ≤21⁰C. February through June when LCT are present (C below).
Note B: The The nitrite beneficial use standards is ≤0.06 from February through June when Lahontan Cutthroat
Trout are present.
Note C: Feb-June ≤10.0 when Lahontan Cutthroat Trout are present.
Note D: Chloride- One-hour and 96-hour acerage concentration limts may only be exceed once every three
years.
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\Att 2, Tbl 2a, 2b, 2c 2d revised/Section B & D
Attachment 2, Table 2b., STANDARDS OF WATER QUALITY - Walker River, Weber Reservoir - Reach C
Walker River Reaches B, C, D and E [Reach B - Walker River at Reservation Boundary to Weber Reservoir] (WR01, WR-02, WR-05 TO WB-01); Reach C - Weber Reservoir (WB-01), Reach D - Weber Reservoir (WB-01) along
Walker River through WR-06, WR--08, to Location WR-10 Walker River, Reach E, Walker River WR-10 to WR12]
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
FOR BENEFIIAL USES
Cultural
Domestic or Municipal Supply
Groundwater Recharge
Industrial
Instream Flow
IrrIgation
Livestock Watering
Recreation; Contact
Recreation; Non-Contact
Riparian Habitat
Wetland Habitat
Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
Beneficial Uses
Aquatic Life Species of Concern: LCT When Present
S.V. Nov-Mar ≤13
Temperature - °C
S.V. Apr-Jun ≤23 (A)
Weber Reservoir
S.V. Jul-Oct≤28
Beneficial Uses [Reach C (WB-01)]
Aquatic Life
PARAMETERS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*
pH
S.V. 6.5-9.0
*
Dissolved Oxygen
S.V ≥5.0 June-Oct.
S.V.≥8.0 Nov.-May
*
S.V.≤0.025
*
Nitrite S.V. ≤5.0 (B)
*
Total Phosphorous
(as P) - mg/l Weber
Reservoir
Nitrogen Species (as
N) - mg/l
Suspended Solids mg/l
Turbidity - NTU
Total Dissolved
Solids - mg/l
Chloride - mg/l
Sulfate - mg/l
E. coli - No./100 ml
*
Nitrate S.V. ≤10
S.V. ≤80
*
Warm S.V ≤50 (C )
*
A-Avg. ≤500
*
Acute ≤800 S.V. ≤230 (D)
S.V. ≤250
G.M.≤126
S.T.V.
≤410
*
*
*
*
Note A: S.V. ≤21⁰C. February through June when LCT are present (C below).
Note B: The The nitrite beneficial use standards is ≤0.06 from February through June when Lahontan
Cutthroat Trout are present.
Note C: Feb-June ≤10.0 when Lahontan Cutthroat Trout are present.
Note D: Chloride- One-hour and 96-hour acerage concentration limts may only be exceed once every three
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\Att 2, Tbl 2a, 2b, 2c 2d revised/Section C - Weber Res
Attachment 2, Table 2c., STANDARDS OF WATER QUALITY - Walker River Reaches E
Walker River [Reach B - Walker River at Reservation Boundary to Weber Reservoir] (WR-01, WR-02, WR-05 TO WB01); Reach C - Weber Reservoir (WB-01), Reach D - Weber Reservoir (WB-01) along Walker River through WR-06,
WR--08, to Location WR-10 Walker River, Reach E, Walker River WR-10 to WR-12]
Beneficial Uses [Reach E (WR-10 amd WR-12)]
Cultural
Domestic or Municipal Supply
Groundwater Recharge
Industrial
Instream Flow
IrrIgation
Livestock Watering
Recreation; Contact
Recreation; Non-Contact
Riparian Habitat
Wetland Habitat
Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat
Beneficial Uses
Aquatic Life Species of Concern: LCT When Present
S.V. Nov-Mar ≤13
Temperature - °C
S.V. Apr-Jun ≤23 (A)
S.V. Jul-Oct≤28
Cold Freshwater Habitat
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
FOR BENEFIIAL USES
Aquatic Life
PARAMETERS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
*
pH
S.V. 6.5-9.0
*
Dissolved Oxygen
S.V ≥5.0 June-Oct.
S.V.≥8.0 Nov.-May
*
S.V.≤0.05
*
Nitrite S.V. ≤5.0 (B)
*
Total Phosphorous
(as P) - mg/l
Nitrogen Species (as
N) - mg/l
Suspended Solids mg/l
Turbidity - NTU
Total Dissolved
Solids - mg/l
Chloride - mg/l
Sulfate - mg/l
E. coli - No./100 ml
*
Nitrate S.V. ≤10
S.V. ≤80
*
S.V ≤50 (C )
*
A-Avg. ≤500
Acute ≤800 S.V. ≤230 (D)
S.V. ≤250
G.M.≤126
S.T.V.
≤410
*
*
*
*
*
Note A: S.V. ≤21⁰C. February through June when LCT are present (C below).
Note B: The The nitrite beneficial use standards is ≤0.06 from February through June when Lahontan
Cutthroat Trout are present.
Note C: Feb-June ≤10.0 when Lahontan Cutthroat Trout are present.
Note D: Chloride- One-hour and 96-hour acerage concentration limts may only be exceed once every three years.
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\Att 2, Tbl 2a, 2b, 2c 2d revised/Section E
Attachment 2, Table 2d, Rationale for Standards
B
1
2 Perameter
C
Reference
D
EPA water quality criteria
ConcentrationsRange
3 Temperature
Gold Book
4 pH
Gold Book
5 Total phosphorus Gold Book
6 Nitrate
Gold Book
7 Nitrite
Gold Book
8 Suspended Solids Gold Book
SV Nov-Mar ≤13, SV Apr-Jue ≤23, SV Jul-Oct ≤28
6.5-9
≤0.05, ≤0.025
≤10
≤5
SV ≤80
SV ≤50
9 Turbidity
FWPCA,1968
10 Total Dissolved Solids
Water quality Control 1988 A-Average ≤500
11 Chloride
12 Sulfate
13 E.coli
Water quality Control 1989 Acute≤ 800 ≤230
Water quality Control 1990 SV 250
RWQC 2012
≤126 G.M. ≤410 STV
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\Att 2, Tbl 2a, 2b, 2c 2d revised/Citation 2018 Standards
J
K
L
M
Special Notes From Tables 2a, 2b and 2c
Note A: S.V. ≤21⁰C. February through June when LCT are present
(C below).
Note B: The The nitrite beneficial use standards is ≤0.06 from
February through June when Lahontan Cutthroat Trout are
present.
Note B: The The nitrite beneficial use standards is ≤0.06 from
February through June when Lahontan Cutthroat Trout are
present.
Note C: Feb-June ≤10.0 when Lahontan Cutthroat Trout are
present.
Note D: Chloride- One-hour and 96-hour acerage concentration
limts may only be exceed once every three years.
ATTACHMENT 2, TABLE 3 - NARRATIVE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Water Quality Control Plan
Walker River Indian Reservation, Nevada
These narrative water quality standards apply to the Walker River on the Reservation and Weber
Reservoir.
1.
Bacteria, Coliform. Waters shall not contain concentrations of coliform bacteria
attributable to human wastes.
2.
Bioaccumulation. Toxic pollutants shall not be discharged as a result of human activities
at levels that will bioaccumulate in aquatic resources to levels that are harmful to human
health or aquatic life.
3.
Biostimulatory Substances. Waters shall not contain biostimulatory substances in
concentrations that cause aquatic growths to the extent that such growths promote
nuisance conditions or adversely affect beneficial uses.
4.
Chemical Constituents. Waters designated as DOMS shall not contain concentrations of
chemical constituents in excess of drinking water standards specified under Tribal code.
The concentration of contaminants in waters that are existing or potential sources of
drinking waters shall not occur at levels, which are harmful to human health. Waters
designated as IRRG or LSWT shall not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in
amounts that adversely affect their beneficial uses for agricultural purposes. Waters shall
not contain concentrations of chemical constituents in amounts that adversely affect water
for other beneficial uses.
5.
Color. Waters shall be free of coloration that causes nuisance or adversely affects the
water for beneficial uses. The natural color of fish or other inland surface water resources
shall not be impaired.
6.
Floating Materials. Waters shall not contain floating material, including solids, liquids,
foams, and scum, in concentrations that cause nuisance or adversely affect the water for
beneficial uses.
7.
Oil and Grease. Waters shall not contain oils, greases, waxes or other materials in
concentrations that result in a visible film or coating on the surface of the water or on
objects in the water, that cause nuisance, or that otherwise adversely affect the water for
beneficial uses.
8.
Pesticides. Pesticide concentrations in water and aquatic sediments shall not exceed
levels that impair the health or reproductive success of human, animal, plant or aquatic
life.
Waters designated as DOMS shall not contain concentrations of pesticides in excess of
drinking water standards specified under Tribal code. [Pesticides are defined to include,
herbicides, rodenticides, fungicides, piscicides and other economic and agricultural
poisons.]
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\Table 03 - Narrative Standards r3 2018.wpd
Page 1 of 2
ATTACHMENT 2, TABLE 3 - NARRATIVE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
Water Quality Control Plan
Walker River Indian Reservation, Nevada
9.
Radioactivity. Radionuclides shall not be present in concentrations which are deleterious
to human, plant, animal or aquatic life nor which result in the accumulation of
radionuclides in the food web to the extent which presents a hazard to human, plant,
animal, or aquatic life.
10.
Sediment and Turbidity. The suspended sediment load and suspended sediment and
turbidity concentrations shall not be altered in such a manner as to cause nuisance or
adversely affect beneficial uses. Waters shall not contain substances in concentrations
that result in deposition of material that causes nuisance or that adversely affects the
water for beneficial uses.
11.
Species Composition. Communities and populations of aquatic biota, including
invertebrate, vertebrate and plant species, shall not be degraded as a result of point source
or nonpoint source discharge. This applies to transient as well as cumulative conditions.
Short-term variances from these objectives may be allowed for actions that are being
taken to fulfill statutory requirements under Tribal law or the federal Endangered Species
Act.
12.
Taste and Odor. Waters shall not contain taste or odor-producing substances discharged
from activities in the watershed in concentrations that impart undesirable tastes or odors
to fish or other edible products of aquatic origin, that cause nuisance or that adversely
affect the water for beneficial uses. The natural taste and odor of fish used for human
consumption shall not be impaired.
13.
Temperature. The ambient receiving water temperature of all waters shall not be altered
by point or nonpoint source inputs unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
the Tribal Council of the Walker River Paiute Tribe [and designated Tribal water quality
standards enforcement agency] that such an alteration in temperature does not adversely
affect the water for beneficial uses.
14.
Toxicity. All waters shall be maintained free of toxic substances which enter the
waterbody from human activities in concentrations that are toxic to, or that produce
detrimental physiological responses in human, plant, animal, or aquatic life. The
concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments, or biota shall not
adversely affect water for beneficial uses. Furthermore, if it is determined that a
compound of toxic affect is interfering with the beneficial uses of any waterbody on
Tribal lands, but that this compound is not identified with a numeric criteria, the Tribe
will consult with the USEPA and may, if appropriate, utilize the best science available to
develop a numeric limit.
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\Table 03 - Narrative Standards r3 2018.wpd
Page 2 of 2
Attachment 2, Tables 4a, 4b and 4c. Aquatic Life Criteria Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 4a
A
Compound
Acrolein
Aldrina
Alkalinityb
alpha-Endosulfana,c
Aluminum pH 6.5 –
9.0
Ammonia
Arsenice,f
beta-Endosulfana,c
Cadmiumf
Carbaryl
Chlordanea
Chloride
Chlorine
Chlorpyrifos
Chromium (III)f
Chromium (VI)f
Copperf
Cyanideh
Demeton
Diazinon
Dieldrin
Endrin
gamma-BHC
(Lindane)
Guthion
Heptachlora
Heptachlor Epoxidea,j
Iron
Leadf
959988
B
Freshwater
Criterion
Criterion
Maximum Continuous
Concentrati Concentrati
on (CMC)
on (CCC)
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
B1
B2
3
3
3
20000
0.22
0.056
7429905
Reservedd
7664417
7440382
33213659
7440439
63252
57749
16887006
7782505
2921882
16065831
18540299
7440508
57125
8065483
333415
60571
72208
340
150
0.22
0.056
See Table 1b
2.1
2.1
2.4
0.0043
860000
230000
19
11
0.083
0.041
See Table 1b
16
11
See Table 2
22
5.2
0.1
0.17
0.17
0.24
0.056a
0.086
0.036i
CAS
Number
107028
309002
58899
0.95
86500
76448
1024573
7439896
7439921
0.01
0.52
0.0038
0.52
0.0038
1000
See Table 1b
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Att 2 Tbl 4 r2 2019.docx Page 1
-
Attachment 2, Tables 4a, 4b and 4c. Aquatic Life Criteria Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
A
Compound
Malathion
Mercuryf,k
Methoxychlor
Mirex
Nickelf
Nonylphenol
Oxygen, Dissolvedl
Parathion
Pentachlorophenol
pHn
Selenium
Silvera,f
Sulfide-Hydrogen
Sulfide
Temperatureo
Toxaphene
Tributyltin (TBT)
Zincf
4,4'-DDTa
CAS
Number
121755
7439976
72435
2385855
7440020
84852153
7782447
56382
87865
7782492
7440224
7783064
8001352
7440666
50293
B
Freshwater
Criterion
Criterion
Maximum Continuous
Concentrati Concentrati
on (CMC)
on (CCC)
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
B1
B2
0.1
1.4
0.77
0.03
0.001
See Table 1b
28
6.6
0.065
0.013
m
19
15m
6.5 – 9
See Table 3
See Table 1b
-
2
0.73
0.0002
0.46
0.072
See Table 1b
1.1
0.001
Footnotes to Table 4a, 4b, 4c of this section:
a. These criteria are based on the 1980 criteria, which used different Minimum Data Requirements and
derivation procedures from the 1985 Guidelines. If evaluation is to be done using an averaging period, the
acute criteria values given are not to be exceeded and should be divided by 2 to obtain a value that is more
comparable to a CMC derived using the 1985 Guidelines.
b. The CCC of 20mg/L is a minimum value except where alkalinity is naturally lower, in which case the
criterion cannot be lower than 25% of the natural level.
c. This value was derived from data for endosulfan and is most appropriately applied to the sum of alphaendosulfan and beta-endosulfan.
d. Freshwater criteria for aluminum is reserved for new values under development. Criteria will be added
once available.
e. This recommended water quality criterion was derived from data for arsenic (III) but is applied here to total
arsenic.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Att 2 Tbl 4 r2 2019.docx Page 2
Attachment 2, Tables 4a, 4b and 4c. Aquatic Life Criteria Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
f.
Freshwater and saltwater criteria for metals are expressed in terms of the dissolved metal in the water
column. See Office of Water Policy and Technical Guidance on Interpretation and Implementation of
Aquatic Life Metals Criteria. See Table 1a for conversion factors.
g. Saltwater criteria for copper is reserved for new values under development. Criteria will be added once
available.
h. These recommended water quality criteria are expressed as µg free cyanide (CN/L).
i. The derivation of the CCC for this pollutant did not consider exposure through the diet, which is probably
important for aquatic life occupying upper trophic levels.
j. This value was derived from data for heptachlor and there was insufficient data to determine relative
toxicities of heptachlor and heptachlor epoxide.
k. This recommended water quality criterion was derived from data for inorganic mercury (II), but is applied
here to total dissolved mercury. If a substantial portion of the mercury in the water column is
methylmercury, this criterion will probably be under protective. In addition, even though inorganic mercury
is converted to methylmercury and methylmercury bioaccumulates to a great extent, this criterion does not
account for uptake via the food chain because sufficient data were not available when the criterion was
derived.
l. For fresh waters, see Quality Criteria for Water, 1986 ("Gold Book"). For marine waters, see Ambient
Aquatic Life Water Quality Criteria for Dissolved Oxygen (Saltwater): Cape Cod to Cape Hatteras (EPA822-R-00-012).
m. Freshwater aquatic life values for pentachlorophenol are expressed as a function of pH and values
displayed in table correspond to a pH of 7.8. CCC = e 1.005(pH) – 5.134, CMC = e 1.005 (pH) – 4.869
n. For open ocean waters where the depth is substantially greater than the euphotic zone, the pH should not be
changed more than 0.2 units from the naturally occurring variation or any case outside the range of 6.5 to
8.5. For shallow, highly productive coastal and estuarine areas where naturally occurring pH variations
approach the lethal limits of some species, changes in pH should be avoided but in any case should not
exceed the limits established for fresh water, i.e., 6.5-9.0.
o. Criteria are species dependent. See Quality Criteria for Water, 1986 ("Gold Book").
Notes to Table 4
1. Freshwater and saltwater aquatic life criteria apply as specified in Section 2.3.3(1).
2. Because of variations in chemical nomenclature systems, this listing of toxic pollutants does not duplicate
the listing in Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 423 - 126 Priority Pollutants. EPA has added the Chemical Abstracts
Services (CAS) registry numbers, which provide a unique identification for each chemical.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Att 2 Tbl 4 r2 2019.docx Page 3
Attachment 2, Tables 4a, 4b and 4c. Aquatic Life Criteria Water Quality Control Plan, Walker
River Paiute Tribe
Table 4b: Conversion Factors for Dissolved Metals
Metal
Freshwater CMC
Freshwater CCC
Arsenic
1.000
1.136672-[(ln
hardness)(0.041838)]
1.000
1.101672-[(ln
hardness)(0.041838)]
0.316
Cadmium
Chromium
III
Chromium
VI
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Saltwater Saltwater
CMC
CCC
1.000
1.000
0.994
0.994
0.860
—
—
0.982
0.962
0.993
0.993
0.960
1.46203-[(ln
hardness)(0.145712)]
0.85
0.998
—
0.85
0.978
0.960
1.46203-[(ln
hardness)(0.145712)]
0.85
0.997
—
—
0.986
0.83
0.83
0.951
0.951
0.85
0.990
0.998
0.85
0.946
0.85
0.990
0.998
—
0.946
Table 4c: Parameters for Calculating Freshwater Dissolved Metals Criteria That Are
Hardness-Dependent
Chemical
mA
bA
mC
bC
Cadmium 0.9789 -3.866 0.7977 -3.909
Chromium
0.8190 3.7256 0.8190 0.6848
III
Lead
1.273 -1.460 1.273 -4.705
Nickel
Silver
Zinc
0.8460 2.255 0.8460 0.0584
1.72 -6.59 —
—
0.8473 0.884 0.8473 0.884
Freshwater Conversion Factors (CF)
CMC
CCC
1.1366721.101672[(lnhardness)(0.041838)]
[(lnhardness)(0.041838)]
0.316
0.860
1.46203[(lnhardness)(0.145712)]
0.998
0.85
0.978
1.46203[(lnhardness)(0.145712)]
0.997
—
0.986
Hardness-dependent metals criteria may be calculated from the following:
CMC (dissolved) = exp{mA [ln(hardness)]+ bA} (CF)
CCC (dissolved) = exp{mC [ln(hardness)]+ bC} (CF)
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\Att 2 Tbl 4 r2 2019.docx Page 4
Table 5. Copper Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan,
Walker River Paiute Tribe
Metal
Copper
CAS No.
7440508
Criterion Maximum
Criterion Continuous
a
Concentration (CMC)
Concentration (CCC) b
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
Acute (CMC) and chronic (CCC) freshwater copper
criteria shall be developed using EPA’s 2007 Aquatic
Life Ambient Freshwater Quality Criteria—Copper
(EPA–822–R–07–001), which incorporates use of the
copper biotic ligand model (BLM).
Where sufficiently representative ambient data for
DOC, calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium,
sulfate, chloride, or alkalinity are not available, the
state or tribe shall use the values from the Draft
Technical Support Document: Recommended
Estimates for Missing Water Quality Parameters for
Application in EPA’s Biotic Ligand Model, March
2016, EPA 820-E-15-106, which is hereby
incorporated by reference. If taking stream order into
account, the state or tribe will use Tables 8, 9, and 10
of the document; for estimates irrespective of stream
order, the state or tribe will refer to Table 4.
a
The CMC is the highest allowable one-hour average instream concentration of copper. The CMC
is not to be exceeded more than once every three years.
b
The CCC is the highest allowable four-day average instream concentration of copper. The CCC
is not to be exceeded more than once every three years.
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\att 2 tbl 5.docx
Table 6. Selenium Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan,
Walker River Paiute Tribe
Criterion Element
Fish Tissuea (EggOvary)b
Fish Tissuea
(Whole Body or
Muscle)d
Water Columne
(Monthly Average
Exposure)
Magnitude
15.1 mg/kg dw
8.5 mg/kg dw
or
11.3 mg/kg dw muscle
(skinless, boneless
filet)
1.5 µg/L in lentic
aquatic systems
Duration
Instantaneous
measurementc
Instantaneous
measurementc
Frequency
Not to be
exceeded
Not to be
exceeded
30 days
Not more than
once in three
years on average
3.1 µg/L in lotic
aquatic systems
e
Water Column
WQCint =
Number of
Not more than
(Intermittent Exposure)f
WQC30-day – Cbkgrnd(1 – days/month with an
once in three
fint)
elevated
years on average
fint
concentration
a
Fish tissue elements are expressed as steady-state.
b
Egg/ovary supersedes any whole-body, muscle, or water column element when fish
egg/ovary concentrations are measured.
c
Fish tissue data provide point measurements that reflect integrative accumulation of selenium
over time and space in fish population(s) at a given site.
d
Fish whole-body or muscle tissue supersedes water column element when both fish tissue
and water concentrations are measured.
e
Water column values are based on dissolved total selenium in water and are derived from fish
tissue values via bioaccumulation modeling. Water column values are the applicable criterion
element in the absence of steady-state condition fish tissue data.
f
Where WQC30-day is the water column monthly element, for either a lentic or lotic waters;
Cbkgrnd is the average background selenium concentration, and fint is the fraction of any 30-day
period during which elevated selenium concentrations occur, with fint assigned a value ≥0.033
(corresponding to 1 day).
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\att 2 tbl 6.docx
Table 7. Ammonia Aquatic Life Criteria for Fresh Waters, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
mg TAN/L
Acute (CMC) equation
(1 hour average)
Chronic (CCC)
equation (30-day
rolling average)*
Note: Ammonia criteria are a function of pH and temperature. At the standard normalized pH
of 7.0 and temperature of 20 oC, the acute criterion would be 17 mg TAN/L and the chronic
criterion would be 1.9 mg TAN/L. Criteria duration: the acute criterion is a one-hour average
and the chronic criterion is a thirty-day rolling average. Criteria frequency: Not to be exceeded
more than once in 3 years.
* Not to exceed 2.5 times the CCC as a 4-day average within the 30-days, i.e. 4.8 mg TAN/L
at pH 7 and 20 oC more than once in 3 years on average.
Note to Table 7: Acute (CMC) and chronic (CCC) freshwater ammonia criteria were developed using EPA’s 2013 Aquatic Life
Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Ammonia - Freshwater (EPA–822–R–13–001), which is hereby incorporated by reference.
Illustrations, tables, and formulae used in the development of these equations can be found on pages 40-52 of the criteria document.
Alternative equations for the presence or absence of Oncorhynchus sp. (rainbow trout) can be found on pages 41-42 of the document.
F:\WRPT_2018\WQCP\att 2 tbl 7.docx
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
A
Pollutant
1,1,1-Trichloroethanea
1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethaneb
1,1,2-Trichloroethanea,b
1,1-Dichloroethylenea
1,2,4,5Tetrachlorobenzene
1,2,4Trichlorobenzenea
1,2-Dichlorobenzenea
1,2-Dichloroethanea,b
1,2-Dichloropropaneb
1,2-Diphenylhydrazineb
1,2-TransDichloroethylenea
1,3-Dichlorobenzene
1,3-Dichloropropeneb
1,4-Dichlorobenzenea
2,4,5-Trichlorophenolc
2,4,6Trichlorophenolb,c
2,4-Dichlorophenolc
2,4-Dimethylphenolc
2,4-Dinitrophenol
2,4-Dinitrotolueneb
2-Chloronaphthalene
2-Chlorophenolc
2-Methyl-4,6Dinitrophenol
3,3'-Dichlorobenzidineb
3-Methyl-4Chlorophenolc
4,4'-DDDb
B
Criteria using a fish
consumption of 22
gpd
B1
Water +
B2
CAS
Organism
Number
Organism
Only
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
71556
10000
200000
79345
0.2
3
79005
75354
0.55
300
8.6
20000
95943
0.03
0.03
120821
0.069
0.073
95501
107062
78875
122667
1000
9.9
0.9
0.03
3000
630
30
0.2
156605
100
4000
541731
542756
106467
95954
7
0.27
300
300
10
11
900
600
88062
1.4
2.7
120832
105679
51285
121142
91587
95578
10
100
10
0.048
800
30
60
2000
300
1.6
1000
800
534521
2
30
91941
0.049
0.14
59507
500
2000
72548
0.00012
0.00012
G:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\att 2 tbl 8 r2.docx
Page 1
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
A
Pollutant
CAS
Number
4,4'-DDEb
4,4'-DDTb
Acenaphthenec
Acrolein
Acrylonitrileb
72559
50293
83329
107028
107131
Aldrinb
309002
alpha-BHC
alpha-Endosulfan
Anthracene
Antimonya,d
319846
959988
120127
7440360
Asbestosa
1332214
Bariuma,e
7440393
a,b
Benzene- Upper CSF
71432
b
Benzidine
92875
b
Benzo(a) Anthracene
56553
a,b
Benzo(a) Pyrene
50328
b
Benzo(b) Fluoranthene
205992
b
Benzo(k) Fluoranthene
207089
b
beta-BHC (beta-HCH)
319857
3321365
beta-Endosulfan
9
Bis(2-Chloro-1108601
Methylethyl) Ether
Bis(2-Chloroethyl)
111444
Etherb
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl)
117817
Phthalatea,b
Bis(Chlormethyl) Ether 542881
Bromoforma,b
75252
Butylbenzyl Phthalate
85687
a,b
Carbon Tetrachloride
56235
G:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\att 2 tbl 8 r2.docx
B
Criteria using a fish
consumption of 22
gpd
B1
Water +
B2
Organism
Organism
Only
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
0.000017
0.000017
0.00003
0.00003
70
90
3
400
0.061
6.7
0.0000007 0.0000007
4
4
0.00035
0.00038
20
30
300
400
5.3
580
7 million
-fibers/L
1000
-0.58
15
0.00014
0.01
0.0012
0.0013
0.00012
0.00013
0.0012
0.0013
0.012
0.013
0.0079
0.014
20
40
200
3000
0.03
2.1
0.32
0.37
0.00015
7
0.1
0.4
0.017
110
0.1
5
Page 2
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
A
Pollutant
Chlordanea
Chlorobenzenea,c
Chlorodibromomethanea,b
Chloroforma,b
Chlorophenoxy
Herbicide (2,4,5-TP)
[Silvex]a
Chlorophenoxy
Herbicide (2,4-D)a
Chrysenea,b
Coppera,b,c
Cyanidea
Dibenzo(a,h)
Anthraceneb
Dichlorobromomethanea,b
Dieldrinb
Diethyl Phthalate
Dimethyl Phthalate
Di-n-Butyl Phthalate
Dinitrophenols
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrina
Endrin Aldehyde
Ethylbenzenea
Fluoranthene
Fluorene
Gamma-BHC (HCH);
Lindanea
Heptachlora,b
Heptachlor Epoxidea,b
Hexachlorobenzenea,b
B
Criteria using a fish
consumption of 22
gpd
B1
Water +
B2
CAS
Organism
Number
Organism
Only
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
57749
0.0003
0.00031
108907
100
800
124481
0.8
20
67663
60
2000
93721
100
400
94757
1300
12000
218019
7440508
57125
0.12
1300
4
0.13
-400
53703
0.00012
0.00013
75274
0.94
26
60571
84662
131113
84742
2555058
7
1031078
72208
7421934
100414
206440
86737
0.0000012
600
2000
20
0.0000012
600
2000
30
10
1000
20
0.03
1
67
20
50
40
0.03
1
120
20
70
58899
4.1
4.3
76448
1024573
118741
0.0000057
0.000031
0.000076
0.0000057
0.000031
0.000076
G:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\att 2 tbl 8 r2.docx
Page 3
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
A
Pollutant
Hexachlorobutadienea,b
Hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) Technical
Hexachlorocyclopentadienea,c
Hexachloroethaneb
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)
Pyreneb
Isophoroneb
Manganesec,f
Methoxychlora
Methyl Bromide
Methylene Chloridea,b
Methylmercury g
Nickeld
Nitratesa
Nitrobenzenec
Nitrosamines
Nitro-sodibutylamineb
Nitro-sodiethylamine b
Nitrosopyrrolidineb
N-Nitrosodimethylamineb
N-Nitrosodi-nPropylamineb
N-Nitrosodiphenylamineb
Pentachloro-benzene
Pentachlorophenol
(PCP)a,b,c
pH
B
Criteria using a fish
consumption of 22
gpd
B1
Water +
B2
CAS
Organism
Number
Organism
Only
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
87683
0.009
0.009
608731
0.0064
0.0098
77474
3
4
67721
0.1
0.1
193395
0.0012
0.0013
78591
7439965
72435
74839
75092
2296792
6
7440020
1479755
8
98953
924163
55185
930552
34
50
0.02
100
20
1800
100
0.02
10000
1000
0.3 mg/kg
470
1500
10000
--
10
0.0008
0.006
0.0008
0.016
500
1.24
0.2
1.24
31
62759
0.00065
2.7
621647
0.0047
0.46
86306
3
5.5
608935
0.1
0.1
87865
0.02
0.04
-
5-9
--
G:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\att 2 tbl 8 r2.docx
Page 4
Table 8. Human Health Criteria, Water Quality Control Plan, Walker River Paiute Tribe
A
Pollutant
Phenolc
Polychlorinated
Biphenyls (PCBs)a,b,h
Pyrene
Recreational Criteria
Seleniuma
Solids Dissolved and
Salinity
Tetrachloroethylenea,b
Toluenea
Toxaphenea,b
Trichloroethylenea,b
Vinyl Chloridea,b
Zincc
B
Criteria using a fish
consumption of 22
gpd
B1
Water +
B2
CAS
Organism
Number
Organism
Only
(µg/L)
(µg/L)
108952
4000
300000
PCB
0.000058
0.000058
129000
20
30
7782492
160
3800
-
250000
--
127184
108883
8001352
79016
75014
7440666
10
57
0.00068
0.6
0.022
7000
28
500
0.00069
7
1.6
23000
Footnotes to Table 8 of this section:
a. EPA has issued a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for this chemical that may be more stringent. See EPA's
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
b. This criterion is based on carcinogenicity of 10-6 risk. Alternate risk levels may be obtained by moving the decimal
point (e.g., for a risk level of 10-5, move the decimal point in the recommended criterion one place to the right).
c. The criterion for organoleptic (taste and order) effects may be more stringent. See National Recommended Water
Quality Criteria - Organoleptic Effects.
d. This criterion was revised to reflect EPA's q1* or RfD as contained in the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS)
as of May 17, 2002. The fish tissue bioconcentration factor (BCF) is from the 1980 Ambient Water Quality Criteria
document.
e. This human health criterion is the same as originally published in the Quality Criteria for Water, 1976 ("Red Book")
which predates the 1980 methodology and did not utilize the fish ingestion BCF approach. This same criterion value is
published in the Quality Criteria for Water, 1986 ("Gold Book").
f. The Human Health for the consumption of Water + Organism criterion for manganese is not based on toxic effects,
but rather is intended to minimize objectionable qualities such as laundry stains and objectionable tastes in beverages.
g. This fish tissue residue criterion for methylmercury is based on the total fish consumption rates used in columns B
through E.
h. This criterion applies to total PCBs (e.g., the sum of all congener or all isomer or homolog or Aroclor analyses).
G:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\att 2 tbl 8 r2.docx
Page 5
Table 9. Recreational Water Quality Criteria, Walker River Paiute Tribe
A
Recommendation 1
Estimated Illiness Rate (NGI):
32 per 1,000 primary contact recreators
Magnitude
GM (cfu/100 mL)a STV (cfu/100 mL)
30
110
Criteria Element
Indicator
Enterococci
(marine and
fresh)
E. coli
100
320
(fresh)
Duration and Frequency: The water body GM should not
be greater than the selected GM magnitude in any 30-day
interval. There should not be greater than a ten percent
excursion frequency of the selected STV magnitude in the
same 30-day interval.
E:\WRPT WQCP\WQCP\att 2 tbl 9 r2.docx
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.