-------
ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY PROFILE
          1976
  ALASKA     IDAHO
  OREGON  WASHINGTON
          REGION X
 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
        120O SIXTH AVENUE
      SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 981O1

-------
f--
                                        COVER PHOTOS TAKEN BY ERIC MEYERSON AND CHRISTOPHER MOFFETT

-------
                                                                                PREFACE
  When the President established by
executive  order  the U.S.  Environ-
mental Protection Agency in 1970, one
of the most  significant mandates  in
that order  was to keep the public in-
formed on  the quality of the environ-
ment. The purpose of this document is
to provide an overview of the environ-
mental quality  of EPA's Region  X —
Alaska  and  the  Pacific  Northwest
States of Idaho, Oregon and Washing-
ton. All of  the basic data  came from
annual reports submitted by the States
to EPA. Without this input the profile
would not have been possible.
  This document is directed  to  both
the public and to Congressional, State,
and local officials. It is intended to help
develop an overall perspective on en-
vironmental issues as well as to assist
in policy analysis, program manage-
ment  and  program  evaluation. This
report is to be the first annual report to
the people of  Region  X and  their
elected and appointed officials on the
quality of our environment.  Is it im-
proving? Where are the problems? And
what can be done to  solve them.
  The National Academy of Sciences
recently  stated that  development of
environmental indices is an "important
and  urgent (natter"  in  our  Nation.
Unfortunately, the data and knowledge
necessary  for scientifically  satisfac-
tory  indices are lacking in many en-
vironmental areas. However, sufficient
data exist to formulate some  useful
indicators.
  Formulating  useful   and  accurate
indices of environmental quality is a
challenging task. Therefore, we would
appreciate suggestions for improving
the information presented in this docu-
ment. Please direct your comments to
the Office  of the  Regional  Admini-
strator, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
Washington 98101.

-------
  This society has come a long way since the time when our daily struggle with
climate and wilderness dominated our ancestors lives, challenged their spirit and
energies, and shaped attitudes that served too well to forge a new Nation... We can
be proud of the progress we have made in improving the Nation's environmental
quality. Yet, we must meet additional challenges over the next few years. We must
improve our understanding of the effects of pollutants and of the means and costs
of reducing pollution. ... We also must continue the job of cleaning up pollution
from existing sources.
                                              	President Gerald R. Ford

-------
                                                                     CONTENTS
             WATER
                      AIR
     RADIATION
         •

   PESTICIDES
SOLID WASTE
                NOISE
Some principal issues ... overall regional stream mile quality ... current water
quality for the region's  16 major river  basins ... trends in  water quality
characteristics of the region's 16 major river basins ... drinking water... regional
programs and projects for improving water quality.
Issues and problems ... days of standards violations for each of 20 problem
counties by type  of pollutant ... days of standards violations  by severity of
violations for each of the 20 counties ... trends in air quality characteristics for the
20 counties ... regional programs and projects for improving air quality.
Discussion of  major issues  in Region X ... past, current and future trends in
exposure to radiation from fallout and industry sources ... regional programs and
projects for radiation protection.
Overview  of principal  issues in the  Northwest  ... trends in concentration of
"persistent" and "nonpersistent" pesticides in the Northwest ...  programs and
projects related to the control and use of pesticides.
Issues related to solid waste disposal ... trends in the number of persons served by
sanitary landfills ... programs and projects for improved solid waste disposal in
the Northwest.
Issues and problems ...  trends  in  the  numbers  of persons  exposed to
unacceptable noise levels ... principal areas of noise control ...  programs and
projects related to noise in the Northwest.

-------
WATER   QUALITY
  Region X includes four States having
833,000 square miles. In that area are
35,855  miles  of tidal  shoreline,
streams  and  inland  bodies of water
with  38,340  miles of riverbank and
shoreline.  Although  this part of the
country  is relatively free of  industrial
water pollution,  the  majority of the
principal river waters  in the Northwest
do not meet all water quality standards.
  The index of water  quality shown in
the chart  at  right is based on the
concept  of percent  of  stream miles
meeting the water quality goals of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
according to criteria recommended by
the National Academy of Sciences.
  A common  water quality  standard
violation  in  many of the  Region's
watersheds results from high bacte-
rial concentrations. However, in many
areas the  levels  are  receding to the
point  that it is  highly possible that sur-
face  runoff rather than  sewage dis-
charge  is  the  principle   problem.
Violations  of  temperature standards
are an additional widespread cause of
standards violations.
  A disturbing trend  is  the  apparent
widespread increase  in  presence of
organic and inorganic toxins. These
may be  traced  to increasing  indus-
trial  output,  but the significance  of
the trend is obscured by the fact that
there was  little sampling  for such
materials in  the  past.  Thus,  toxic
materials such as RGB's may well have
been far more common in water than
was  suspected  before active  moni-
toring began.
  A continuing challenge is upgrading
the quality of waste water treatment as
required under the Federal Water Pol-
lution   Control  Act.   Construction,
operation, maintenance and replace-
ment of sewers and waste  treatment
plants and the modification of indus-
trial  processes will require millions of
dollars a year in Region X states.
           PRESENT QUALITY OF NORTHWEST RIVERS AND TRIBUTARIES
   100
                                                                 MEETS FEDERAL
                                                                 QUALITY GOALS
                                                                 PROVISIONALLY
                                                                 MEETS FEDERAL
                                                                 QUALITY GOALS

                                                                 FAILS TO MEET
                                                                 FEDERAL QUALITY
                                                                 GOALS- POLLUTED
The chart above illustrates the relative quality of the Region's 16 principal river basins. The chart is
shown in terms of percent of the river with differing water quality. The blue portions of the chart
show the percentage of the river which meets Federal water quality goals, while the yellow shows
the percentage of the river which provisionally meets water quality goals, and the red portion
illustrates the percentage which fails to meet water quality goals.

-------
                                                          WATER    QUALITY
Comparison of the charts below illustrating
"Point Source-Related Pollutants" and "River
and  Stream Miles Meeting  Federal Goals"
provides some interesting insights into water
pollution trends in the Northwest. State and
Federal pollution  control programs are now
heavily oriented toward controlling municipal
and  industrial  waste  discharges.  The
effectiveness of  these  programs is  clear.
Between 1966 and 1974 criteria violations of
samples  analyzed  for  discharge  related
pollutants  declined  from  31  percent  to 21
percent, a 33 percent reduction.

POINT SOURCE/RELATED
POLLUTANTS
     1001
      uur
      40
      30
      20
      10
UJ
Q_
                                           If our evaluation of water quality is broadened to include parameters not discharge-related, such as
                                           pesticides and gas saturation, our picture of water quality is altered considerably. The chart
                                           showing "River and Stream Miles Meeting Federal Goals" indicates a perceptible decline in water
                                           quality in the Northwest  during the past decade. The proportion  of total stream miles that
                                           consistently meet Federal goals (blue) is decreasing. This is offset to some extent by increases in
                                           the total stream miles that provisionally meet Federal goals (yellow). The reasons for this decline
                                           are apparently related to the intensity of water and land use. Rivers east of the Cascades heavily
                                           used for power generation and irrigation account for most of the apparent overall decline in water
                                           quality. Federal and State pollution control programs have not addressed these problems and other
                                           non-point sources during the past ten years. As a consequence non-point source control programs
                                           are receiving increasing emphasis and will encompass a large part of the future thrust of pollution
                                           control here in the Northwest.
                                                         STREAM MILES MEETING FEDERAL GOALS
                                                  100 r
                                                                                                      MEETS FEDERAL
                                                                                                      WATER QUALITY
                                                                                                      GOALS

                                                                                                      PROVISIONALLY
                                                                                                      MEETS FEDERAL
                                                                                                      WATER QUALITY
                                                                                                      GOALS

                                                                                                      FAILS TO MEET
                                                                                                      WATER QUALITY
                                                                                                      GOALS: POLLUTED
       1966 1968  1970  1972  1974
                                                          1966-1968 1969-1971  1972-1974

-------
WATER  QUALITY
Standards/Criteria Violations
   RIVER BASIN
  PRNC.
  RIVER
KOOTENAI

CLARK FORK/
PENDOREILLE



 SPOKANE
 UPPER COLUMBIA
 YAKIMA
 LOWER COLUMBIA
 WILLAMETTE
 SPOKANE
  UPPER
COLUMBIA
 LOWER
COLUMBIA
WILLAMETTE
 PUGETSOUND
 WASHINGTON
 COAST
 GREEN
CHEHALIS
 YAKIMA   4 -»•
BEAR
BEAR
-»•
   RIVER BASIN
PRNC.
RIVER
                                              OREGON COAST
                                             SOUTHERN
                                             OREGON LAKES
                                              KLAMATH
                                              ROGUE
                                             KLAMATH
                                 B    D
UPPER SNAKE

MIDDLE SNAKE

LOWER SNAKE
UPPER
SNAKE

MIDDLE
SNAKE

LOWER
SNAKE
-

-»-

-
LEGEND

(I NOT A CONTRIBUTOR TO VIOLATIONS

|   | MINOR CONTRIBUTOR TO VIOLATIONS

    MAJOR CONTRIBUTOR TO VIOLATIONS

    INSUFFICIENT DATA, BUT NO VIOLATIONS PRESUMED

NUMBERS OF VIOLATIONS

 |  INCREASING  fTI DECREASING | ->- | UNCHANGING

-------
                                                       WATER   QUALITY
                                                            Definitions  of  Parameters
  In order to understand the signifi-
cance of standards violations it is nec-
essary to  know what characteristic of
the water  is not meeting the standard.
While  many  factors  are taken into
consideration in the development and
application of water quality standards,
there are  ten principal  water quality
characteristics  that are of particular
interest. These are:
  TROPH  (Trophic  condition): This
refers  to  the  intensity  of biological
activity. Excessive biological activity is
characterized  by very murky,  turbid
water and nuisance-level growths of
algae and aquatic weeds.
The chart at left shows trends for 10 principal
characteristics of river water quality for the
Region's 15 major river basins. An upward
pointing arrow indicates that  the pollution
characteristic  is worsening,  a  downward
pointing arrow indicates it is improving, and a
sidewise pointed arrow indicates no change in
the recent past. The blue color  indicates that
the  characteristics is not a contributor to
standards violations for the river basin while
the yellow and red colors respectively indicate
relative  minor and major contributions to
violations.
  DO  (Dissolved  Oxygen):  Oxygen
dissolved in water or sewage.  Ade-
quately dissolved oxygen is essential
to the life of fish and other aquatic
organisms that form the beginning of
the life chain. Discharge of excessive
organic solids generally are cause of
low DO concentrations.
  TEMP: Temperature of water gov-
erns both the nature of life forms and
the rate of chemical reactions. In gen-
eral, higher temperatures are undesir-
able for the types of fish and shellfish
found in the Northwest and Alaska.
  PH: This is a measure of acidity or
alkalinity of water.  Extreme levels of
either can imperil fish life and speed
corrosion.

  TDG:  Total  Dissolved  Gases—a
measure of the concentration of gases
in solution  in water—can effect the
metabolism of aquatic life forms. High
concentrations  of gases in excess of
120 percent can cause high mortalities
in migrating fish.
  TDS: Total Dissolved Solids is the
measure of  nongaseous minerals in
solution  in water—its  relative "salti-
ness". Excesses affect water taste and
cause mineral build-up in  pipes and
appliances.

  BACT:  Bacteria  indicating the
probable presence of disease-causing
organisms and viruses not natural to
water. They come from the intestine of
mammals, including man.
  AEST   (Aesthetics):   Refers   to
detectable oil and grease, sediment,
and similar considerations.

  RAD: Radioactivity may be present
in water  as  a result of discharge  of
radioactive wastes or fallout.  Its slow
decay  presents  a  direct  threat  to
aquatic life and potential increase in
the cumulative dose rate for other life
forms.

  OTOX: Organic Toxicants  include
pesticides and other poisons that have
the same  effects  and persistence as
pesticides.

  ITOX: Inorganic Toxicants are heavy
metals and other elements. Although
naturally found in water and essential
to life in low concentrations, excess
concentrations are poisonous.

-------
WATER  QUALITY
Programs  and  Planning Efforts
  NPDES—Under  the  National
Pollutant  Discharge  Elimination
System   (NPDES)  water  pollution
cleanup permits had been  issued to
most of 2,500 industrial, municipal and
Federal   dischargers  by  mid-1975.
These permits, called "first-generation
permits,"  virtually  all  require
improvement  in  the  quality  of
discharged  water under schedules to
be met within the. next five years or
less.
  With the issuance of permits almost
complete, the States and  EPA will be
monitoring compliance  by  the
dischargers.  During  Fiscal  1975,
enforcement actions were  instituted
against 54 violators in Region X.
  AREAWIDE 208 PROGRAM—Local
government planning  agencies in 10
areas of Washington, Oregon  and
Idaho have  launched two-year studies
aimed  at  developing   long-term
comprehensive  waste treatment
management plans  for  areawide
implementation.  The areawide
planning effort comes under Section
208 of the Federal Water  Pollution
Control Act. The agencies have been
allotted $6.2 million in Federal funds
to cover  the  cost  of  the  planning
program.  The States are designing a
companion planning program to cover
the  remaining  areas   under  their
jurisdiction. A major emphasis of the
Statewide  program  will  be  on
controlling  nonpoint  sources of
pollution  such  as  agriculture  and
forestry activities. Other point sources
activities,  water quality standards, and
groundwater contamination  will  be
addressed as well.

  The State and local 208 programs
provide  significant opportunity  for
citizens interested  in clean water to
take  part  in decisions as to  how the
goals of the law will be achieved in their
areas.
  CONSTRUCTION  GRANTS—This
year, over $100 million will be awarded
to municipalities in Region X to build
waste water treatment facilities. Under
this program, the Federal Government
contributes 75 percent of the  eligible
costs  of the facility.  Priorities for
project funding are established by the
State  agencies  under  authority  of
Section  201  of  the  Federal  Water
Pollution Control Act. The delegation
to the States of responsibilities relating
to the administration of construction
grants has contributed significantly to
Region X's National leadership in the
program. As possibly the largest public
works program in the country, great
progress has  been  made  toward
reduction  of  waste  discharges  in
municipalities, as  well as providing
approximately 4,000 jobs in the North-
west and Alaska to  aid in  deterring
National unemployment.

-------
  The drinking water supplied to most
homes in Region X is safe. Sources of
water supply in  the Northwest are of
better quality than those found in most
other parts of the country. Neverthe-
less, studies over the past 10  years
indicate that  drinking  water quality
may be deteriorating. The increasing
volume, variety and complexity  of
pollutants  that enter our  ground and
surface water sources pose new prob-
lems while our methods of water treat-
ment remain tuned to contaminants of
an earlier era.
  Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Wash-
ington  combined  have  more than
10,000 public water supply  systems
that  must  meet minimum  National
drinking water standards. Most cur-
rent problems occur with  smaller sys-
tems, and  may be attributed to poor
design,  poor  operating and  mainte-
nance  procedures,  and  inadequate
testing of water quality. In many cases,
small systems do not generate enough
revenue to provide the facilities, per-
sonnel, and services needed to ensure
consistent  high  quality  of  drinking
water. Region X will work  closely with
State and local health agencies to help
                                                   WATER  QUALITY
                                                                                              Water
identify solutions to problems that pre-
vent these systems from providing safe
water.
  The chart below provides a profile
of certain  issues related to mainte-
nance and  improvement of safe drink-
ing water  supplies  in  the  Region.
Issues with a high  priority need for
                  attention are marked  in  red, while
                  those  with  a  lesser  priority  are
                  marked in yellow  and  blue. Starting
                  in 1977, data will be available to more
                  accurately estimate the number or per-
                  centage of the Region's  population
                  served by water supplies meeting the
                  National standards.
           PROBLEM
                            STATUS
   PLANNING, COORDINATION
   AND DESIGN OF FACILITIES
  OPERATION AND MAINTEN-
  ANCE OF FACILITIES
                   NEEDS IMPROVEMENT
                   BACTERIA
  HEALTH
  STANDARDS
INORGANIC
SOME WORK NEEDED
                   ORGANIC
  MONITORING
                   NEEDS IMPROVEMENT

-------
AIR   QUALITY
  Many urban residents are more con-
cerned with air quality than any other
environmental  feature.  This  is  evi-
denced by the frequent reporting of
air quality indices on radio, television
and in the press  in many large cities.
The Clean Air Act of 1970 gave EPA
authority  to  establish  ambient  air
quality  standards which specify,  for
the principal  and most widespread
classes of air pollutants,  limitations
necessary to protect the public health
and welfare.
  These  pollutants  are:  particulate
matter,  sulfur oxides, hydrocarbons,
carbon  monoxide,  photochemical
oxidants,  and  nitrogen oxides.  The
standards are further divided into two
categories: primary standards which
are set at  levels required to protect the
public health; and secondary stand-
ards which are set at levels intended to
prevent the many other undesirable
effects of  air pollution.
  EPA  Region  X  has identified  20
areas in the four States  which com-
prise the  principal  industrial   and
populated urban  areas of high  pol-
lution potential.  In  each there are a
number of sites at which the concen-
tration of air pollutants are measured.
These  sites  are selected  both to
provide general air quality information
and  to  monitor existing  or potential
problems.

  In  order to characterize the air qual-
ity problems of the Region, the number
of days  per year during which the pri-
mary air quality standard  was violated
is shown in the  charts. Accordingly,
the chart is not representative of the
entire county but of the worst known
problem site for  each pollutant type,
i.e., it shows the "worst case".
The first chart opposite shows days of stand-
ards violations  for each of  the 20  priority
counties in Region  X. The  chart is color-
coded to show  the days of standards viola-
tions for carbon  monoxide, particulate matter,
oxidants, and sulfur dioxide.

The  lower chart shows days of standards
violations for each  of the 20 counties in
Region X in terms of the severity of the viola-
tion. The yellow area of each bar on the chart
represents  days in which the primary stand-
ard was violated but the "alert" level was not
reached. The red area of the bar shows the
number of days  for which the "alert" level for
any one of the  principal air  pollutants was
exceeded.

An "alert" level is the level at which the public
is  notified that there is  an air pollution
problem.

The lack of 862 violations shown on the tables
at right should not be construed to suggest
there are no problems with SC>2 in Region X.
There are several areas where primary SC>2
standards are being violated within the Region,
but they are single source related and do not
fall within the high population areas.

-------
                                         AIR QUALITY
                                            Standards Violations
DAYSOFSTD'S VIOLATIONS BYTYPE OF POLLUTANT
cc
<
LJLJ
>-
CC
HI
CL
(/)

<
Q
210

180

150

120

 90

 60

 30
DAYS OF STD'S VIOLATIONS BY SEVERITY
cc
<
LJJ
>-
CC
III
CL
(/)
<
o
210

180

150

120

 90

 60

 30
                   54
                             29
                            135
                                      3
                                      ••
                                      79

                                             133
                                                 n
     X/
                                                          PARTICULATE
                                                          MATTER
                                                          CARBON
                                                          MONOXIDE

                                                          OXIDANTS

                                                          SULFUR
                                                          DIOXIDE
ABOVE
PRIMARY
STANDARD

ABOVE
ALERT
LEVEL
                                                                    8

-------
AIR  QUALITY
  Region X has relatively few heavily
populated urban centers (only 6.5 mil-
lion residents in the four States com-
bined).  But where  there are major
urban centers, air pollution problems
exist.
  The  Seattle and  Spokane metro-
politan  areas  still  have  significant
carbon monoxide  problems too many
days of the year. Carbon monoxide
(CO) is a major threat to the residents
of Fairbanks, Alaska, during its long
winter  and is  becoming an increas-
ing problem in other Alaska cities such
as  Anchorage. Developments
associated with the Alaska Pipeline are
expected  to  compound  this  latter
problem.
  Portland, Oregon, has frequent CO
problems and  other air  quality prob-
lems.  In other communities, such as
Tacoma, Washington,  and  Kellogg,
Idaho,   the   problems   stem  from
industry. Heavy  metals  and  sulfur
oxides emissions  from smelters have
long been difficult problems in both
areas.

  EPA is  working closely with the
States of Alaska, Washington  and
Oregon to  establish  mechanisms to
reduce the CO levels in problem areas.
This  includes  measures  to  reduce
emissions from vehicles as well as
measures  to  reduce the  number of
vehicle miles traveled in urban centers
having high levels of CO.

  The combined monitoring and sur-
veillance systems of EPA, the State and
local air pollution  control agencies in
Region X have nearly 200 monitoring
stations throughout the Region. These
stations are backed up by a recently
built  mobile  monitoring  facility
utilized  for  emergency,   short-term
requirements.
These  charts show trends in each of  the
priority counties for Region X. The direction
of the arrows indicates whether the number
of days of standards violations is increasing,
decreasing,  or  remaining the same. Blue
colors  indicate the pollutant is  not a con-
tributor  to  days  of  standards  violations.
Yellow and red indicate relative severity of the
problem.

-------
                                             AIR  QUALITY
 Trends in Air Pollutants in Primary Abatement Areas
ALASKA

PRIMARY ABATEMENT AREA  <*
 ANCHORAGE
 FAIRBANKS
IDAHO
 BANNOCK
 ADA
 POWER
WASHINGTON
 SPOKANE
 CLARK
 COWLITZ
 KING
 SNOHOMISH
 PIERCE
                                       OREGON

                                       PRIMARY ABATEMENT AREA
                                         LINN
                                        LANE
                                        POLK
                                        WASHINGTON
                                        CLACKAMAS
                                        MULTNOMAH
                                        COLUMBIA
                                        MARION
                                        JACKSON
NO VIOLATIONS OF STANDARDS

EXCEEDS PRIMARY STANDARD |  +

EXCEEDS ALERT LEVEL     I  f
                                                                    INCREASING

                                                                    UNCHANGING

                                                                    DECREASING
                                            INSUFFICIENT DATA BUT PRESUMED IN COMPLIANCE

                                         * | INSUFFICIENT DATA BUT PRESUMED EXCEEDING
                                            PRIMARY LEVEL
                                                                          10

-------
RADIATION
  Awareness of the potential for radia-
tion problems  is greater in  Region X
than in many other areas because of
the  Hanford   (Washington) Atomic
Works, the Arco (Idaho) nuclear facil-
ity, the  forthcoming  Trident  sub-
marine base at Bangor (Washington)
and the increasing number of nuclear
power plants. Similar to the rest of the
Nation is the awareness that applica-
tions and uses of radiation are rapidly
increasing.

  Two types of radiation contribute to
the problem of  control: ionizing, which
is  produced by radioactive materials
and  radiation-producing   machines
such as X-ray equipment;  and  non-
ionizing,  produced by television re-
ceivers, radar, lasers, etc.  Primary
threats to health associated with these
types of radiation are carcinogenic
effects and physiological changes due
to heat.
  The environmental risks, such as
contamination of land, air, water and
natural resources also are of concern.
  The number of nuclear power plants
is projected  to  increase significantly
by the year 2000. Protection of the
public  health  and  environment  re-
quires that the  impact of radioactive
releases into the environment be pru-
dently examined as more power re-
actors  and  associated facilities are
developed. Waste materials must be
isolated from the biosphere until their
radiation has  decayed or  been  re-
moved to levels of insignificance. No
suitable technology for the  ultimate
disposal of  these  wastes has been
developed. Until a solution is obtained
interim  waste  management  proce-
dures must  be monitored to assure
waste containmnet.
  EPA is working closely with State
officials in Washington and Oregon to
establish a workable emergency plan
should  there  be an  accident  at a
nuclear power plant. (Note: The table's
reference to  per capita radiation dose
rate from nuclear power plants aver-
ages a fraction of a millirem per year.
The table deals with the normal plant
operation and does not take into con-
sideration   the  possibility  of an
accident.)
  EPA's role in radiation  is primarily
one of setting environmental ambient
standards and monitoring.
11

-------
                                                                               RADIATION
  SOURCEOF
  RADIATION
  EXPOSURE
   FALLOUT
  INDUSTRY
NEAR-TERM
  (1-5 YR.)
LONG-TERM
  (5-50 YR.)
CURRENT
                 POTENTIAL
                 FOR
                 INCREASE
The table to the right helps put the radiation
exposure  problem  in  perspective  by
comparison to what every individual receives
from natural radiation exposure. As the table
indicates, there is a significant, continuing per
capita radiation dose rate from medical uses of
ionizing radiations, and it is believed this rate
will continue.
                    The chart at left shows the trends for radiation
                    exposure. The total radiation dose to the
                    population  from  ionizing  radiation  is
                    increasing. This is due to a number of factors
                    including increasing population, increasing
                    variety of radiation applications, the expansion
                    of existing  applications, and changes  in
                    lifestyle  resulting in increased exposure to
                    certain types of sources.
                                                   RADIATION DOSE RATE FROM VARIOUS SOURCES*
                                                       SOURCE OF EXPOSURE IN MILLIREMS**
       NATURAL
       Occupational
       Nuclear Power
       Fuel Reprocessing
       AEC Activities Other
         Than Open-Air
         Weapons Testing
       Open-Air Weapons Testing
       TV, Consumer Products,
         Air Travel
       Diagnostic Radiology
                                                                              1960
                                                                              130.0
                                                                               0.75
                                                                               0.0001
                                                                               0.01
                                                                              13.0+
                        1970
                        130.0
                          0.8
                          0.002
                          0.0008
                          0.01
                          4.0

                          2.6
                         72.0
                                                                2000
                                                                130.0
                                                                  0.9
                                                                  0.2
                                                                  0.2
                                                                  0.01
                                                                  4.9
                                        209.
    *From Environmental Protection Agency (1972)
   **The millirem is a unit of biological dosage related to the amount of
     energy deposited in tissue by various kinds of ionizing radiations.
    + 1963
                                                                                                                    12

-------
PESTICIDES
  The  decline of agricultural use of
chlorinated  hydrocarbon  pesticides
has  necessitated a greater  reliance
upon organophosphates  and carba-
mates for insect control. These chem-
icals degrade rather quickly,  which is
of long term importance to the environ-
ment. They are often extremely toxic
and  therefore  more  dangerous  to
apply. This has resulted in applicator
certification  and training,  safe   re-
entry practices, public education pro-
grams and accident surveillance.
  In  addition to participating in  pri-
mary and ongoing National programs
such as pesticide  registration, certi-
fication of  applicators,  etc.,  EPA
Region X is also currently involved in
several other major pesticide-related
issues.
  Perhaps the most pressing  of these
at this time is the problem of disposing
of used  agricultural  pesticide con-
tainers. The  Region  has   recently
awarded  a  contract  to  a   private
research concern to identify the extent
of this  problem.
     Accidental herbicide damage to
non-target crops is also  an  area of
great concern. The  Region has  re-
cently developed  a  pilot program
designed to inform Chicano migrant
workers about pesticide safety and
use. The prime thrust of this effort, one
of the first of  its kind in the country,
has been to provide educational pro-
grams for workers.

  Monitoring  and  laboratory  re-
search in pesticides is at a high level
in this  Region. For  several   years,
major facilities in Wenatchee  and in
Boise  have been  conducting epi-
demiological and laboratory studies
on the effects of chronic  pesticides
on man and his environment.

  The majority of  pesticides in cur-
rent  and  recent use can be divided
into two general defined categories:
"persistent"  and  "non-persistent".
Persistent  pesticides have  chemical
properties   that  are  comparatively
resistant   to  natural  breakdown
processes.  This  group   includes
most of the chlorinated  hydrocarbon
insecticides (DDT,  dieldrin,  etc.),
and some  of the mercury-containing
fungicides.  The non-persistent  group
consists of naturally derived as well as
synthetic substances used to control
pests.  Pesticides  of  this  type  are
usually either more easily degradable
(such  as  organophosphates and
carbamates), or relatively more selec-
tive as to target pest affected (such
as pyrethrins, biological controls, etc.).
  The accompanying chart illustrates
the general  status  of  these  agri-
culturally important substances; sev-
eral trends are apparent. Because of
their residual properties, concentra-
tions of persistent chemicals build-up
in the systems  of animals as one
moves up  the food  chain.  Little is
known of the possible consequences
that might  result from long-term ex-
posure to even very small amounts of
these   substances  in  our  everyday
existence, and the use of many of these
persistent   substances  has  recently
undergone  a marked decline. This is
perhaps best illustrated in the case of
DDT,  which can  now be used only
under  very special  and  necessary
circumstances.

-------
                                                     PESTICIDES
     The chart below illustrates the trend in the
     concentrations of  two  categories of  the
     principal  types  of pesticides  in  the
     environment. Because of the restrictions on
     the use of DDT, aldrin, dieldrin,  etc.,  this
     classification is in  a decreasing trend.  The
    organo-phosphates  (non-persistent), which
    have been substituted for the  chlorinated
    hydrocarbons, are  increasing in use. But
    because of their short life, their concentrations
    in  the environment do not  significantly
    increase.
GENERALTYPE
AMOUNT
USED
CONCENTRATION IN
AIR
WATER
SOIL
FOOD
AND
FEED
PERSISTENT PESTICIDES
  (CHLORINATED
  HYDROCARBONS,
  MERCURIALS, ETC.)
NON-PERSISTENT PESTICIDES
  (ORGANOPHOSPHATES,
  CARBONATES,
  BIOLOGICAL, ETC.)
t
             SATISFACTORY CONDITION
             AREAS OF CONCERN; MORE ACTION NEEDED
                        INCREASING

                        DECREASING

                        UNCHANGING
                                                                                        14

-------
SOLID WASTE
  Waste management presents a spec-
trum of problems, from extreme health
and environmental hazard to the effi-
ciency of collection operations. The
diverse nature  of  the  wastes (dead
animals,  mercury-rich  industrial
sludges,  dredge  spoils, abandoned
cars,  septic  tank pumpings, residen-
tial solid  waste,  infectious hospital
wastes,  demolition  debris,  feedlot
wastes, etc.) and their occurrence
makes the challenge of waste manage-
ment  as complex as its sources.

  Many disposal methods pollute the
land,  air or water. For example, burn-
ing dumps contribute to air pollution
and  some disposal sites,  especially
west of the Cascade mountains, are so
situated  that leachate and drainage
waters aggravate the pollution of rivers
and streams.

  The long-term  solution  to solid
waste management problems  lies  in
the development of systems that will
wisely control the quantity and charac-
teristics of wastes. This can be done by
efficient collection, creative recycling,
recovering energy and other resources,
and properly disposing of wastes that
have  no further use. In the near term,
the development of  environmentally
acceptable methods of disposal on
land is one of our objectives. Current
programs and projects include:

  State  solid waste  grant  program.
Region X provides annual  grants to
States to serve as the catalysts for the
development  and  improvement  of
State  solid  waste programs.  State
Solid Waste  Management Plans  have
been developed in all  four States; haz-
ardous waste inventories have been
published in  three States  (only  two
other States  have completed hazard-
ous  waste  inventories); hazardous
waste management  programs  have
been  established  in   two  States;
Oregon  has hazardous waste regula-
tions and Washington is preparing a
State Resource Recovery Plan.

  Disposal site  information system.
Region X developed  a computerized
disposal  site information system in
three States and the fourth State plans
to join the system during the next fiscal
year. The system provides  a mecha-
nism for  storing, updating, and  re-
trieving  information  on  both active
and inactive solid waste disposal sites.
This system is  now  being  set up in
other EPA Regional Offices  based on
the Region X experience.
  Status of hazardous waste manage-
ment. Region X contracted with a con-
sulting firm to develop a report "Status
of Hazardous  Waste Management in
Region  X."  This  project will tie the
existing types of industrial processes
in Region X to the specific types and
quantities of hazardous waste they are
likely to produce. The product of this
study will be a report that will assist
both EPA and the States of Region X in
expanding and improving their hazard-
ous waste programs.
  Enforcement. There is no specific
Federal solid waste regulator power,
but Region X has  been able to use air
and  water  pollution  laws and  the
1899 Refuse Act to eliminate  the en-
vionmental insults from offensive solid
waste practices.
  Federal facilities. EPA is empowered
to develop various guidelines for solid
waste  management practices which
are mandatory for Federal agencies.
In addition  to land  disposal guide-
lines  developed  earlier  EPA  is now
publishing several guidelines that will
require  resource recovery at Federal
facilities. Agencies will be required to
recycle  paper, use resource recovery
plants, and use deposit type beverage
containers.
15

-------
                                                        SOLID   WASTE
                                             Resource  Recovery;  Landfills
Resource recovery systems are in operation only in Cowlitz County, Washington, indicated by a
blue dot. Yellow dots indicate location of counties and municipalities committed to undertaking
resource recovery activities. Black dots indicate counties and municipalities where resource
recovery planning is in progress.
 Chart indicates percentage of population
 served by disposal facilities meeting State
 requirements in Washington, Oregon, Idaho,
 and Alaska.
RESOURCE RECOVERY ACTIVITIES
        WASHINGTON
       PORTLAND
     *SALEM
   PERCENT OF POPULATION
SERVED BY FACILITIES MEETING
    STATE REQUIREMENTS

   100% r
                                                                      80%
                                                                      60%
                                                                      40%
   20%
                                                                            1972*  1973* 1974
                                                                                REGION X
                                                                   'EXCLUDES ALASKA
                                                                                              16

-------
NOISE
  Sound, so vital a part of our exist-
ence, is growing to such disagreeable
proportions within our environment
today that  it is a  very real threat to
health. The problem is not limited to
occupation noise and hearing loss, but
also includes community noise, which
affects  us  not only physiologically,
but   psychologically   (nervousness,
tension, etc.) as well.
  In view  of  these facts,  Congress
passed the Noise Control Act of 1972
which gives EPA authority to set stand-
ards on new products that are major
sources of noise (cars, trucks, etc.) and
existing noise  sources (interstate rail-
roads, trucks and aircraft) which need
national uniformity of treatment.
  However, the primary responsibility
for  control of noise  rests with  State
and local governments. EPA provides
technical  assistance  to  States  and
communities that need help in writing
legislation  and establishing  noise
control enforcement programs.

  Technical  assistance  is provided
in areas such as:
 •  Developing model legislation
 •  Reviewing  proposed  legislation
    and regulations
 •  Training of State and local offi-
    cials in  writing  laws and  ordi-
    nances and in noise enforcement
    measurement techniques
  Some examples  include assistance
to Oregon and Washington in develop-
ing noise regulations, assistance to the
cities of Anchorage, Seattle and Port-
land in developing  noise control ordi-
nances, and the monitoring of noise
levels  from   railroad  locomotives,
ferries and auto and motorcycle race-
tracks.
  Future trends indicated on the facing
page reflect expected developments
due  to EPA product-related activities
and  the effect of noise-control efforts
in Oregon and Washington. Idaho and
Alaska, the latter undergoing a popula-
tion increase, presently lack noise con-
trol regulations.
17

-------
                                                                NOISE
                                                     Areas and Trends
PRINCIPAL AREAS OF NOISE CONTROL
     TYPEOFCONTROL
FEDERAL   STATE
  INTERSTATE VEHICLE STANDARDS
  CONSTRUCTION NOISE
  STANDARDS (ORDINANCES)
  BUILDING CODES
  (INSULATION & LOCATION)
  AIRPORTS/AIRCRAFT
         IMPLE-
         MENTATION
         NEEDED
 LOCAL
IMPLE-
MENTATION
NEEDED
TRENDS IN NUMBERS OF PERSONS EXPOSED
TO UNACCEPTABLE NOISE LEVELS
    SOURCES OF NOISE
  GROUND TRANSPORTATION
  AIRPORTS/AIRCRAFT
  CONSTRUCTION
  INDUSTRIAL
                                                         LEGEND
                               m
SATISFACTORY CONDITION


AREAS OF CONCERN;
MORE ACTION NEEDED


SERIOUS PROBLEM



INCREASING


DECREASING


UNCHANGING
                                                                             18

-------
SUMMARY
                    This first Environmental Profile of thefour States comprising Region
                  X of the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency is based  on data
                  compiled  over a number of years. Both State and Federal sources of
                  data were used.
                    This profile  is intended  to  help the  public and  its elected and
                  appointed officials at all levels of government better understand the
                  state of the environment in  the Northwest and Alaska.
                    One of the  principal difficulties in developing an  overview  of
                  environmental  quality lies in selecting measures that do not overly
                  simplify or mask complex and important underlying issues. Each of the
                  topical areas treated in this document  can be discussed in  much
                  greater detail.
                    Additional information is  available from
                                 Office of Public Affairs
                                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                 Region X,  Mailstop 605
                                 1200 Sixth Avenue
                                 Seattle, Washington  98101
                    The chart  opposite  provides  a synopsis of  trends for certain
                  environmental quality parameters for  Region X as a whole.
1Q

-------
SYNOPSIS OF ENV
       INDICATOE
COMPONENT
WATER
AIR
RADIATION
PESTICIDES
SO LID WASTE
NOISE
RIVER MILES NOT
MEETING STANDARDS
SEVERITY OF VIOLATION
OF STANDARDS
DAYS OF STANDARDS
VIOLATIONS
SEVERITY OF POLLUTION
IN DAYS IN WHICH
STANDARDS VIOLATED
NEAR-TERM EXPOSURE
CONCENTRATION IN FOOD,
WATER, AIR
PERCENT POPULATION
SERVED BY SANITARY
LAND-FILLS
NUMBER OF PERSONS
EXPOSED TO UNACCEPT-
ABLE NOISE LEVELS
INDICATO ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^M






^^^^^^H

-------
            Postage and Fees Paid
U S Environmental Protection Agency
                      EPA — 335
         3RD CLASS BULK RATE

-------
SYNOPSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL
             INDICATORS  1976
COMPONENT
WATER
AIR
RADIATION
PESTICIDES
SO LID WASTE
NOISE
RIVER MILES NOT
MEETING STANDARDS
SEVERITY OF VIOLATION
OF STANDARDS
DAYS OF STANDARDS
VIOLATIONS
SEVERITY OF POLLUTION
IN DAYS IN WHICH
STANDARDS VIOLATED
NEAR-TERM EXPOSURE
CONCENTRATION IN FOOD,
WATER, AIR
PERCENT POPULATION
SERVED BY SANITARY
LAND-FILLS
NUMBER OF PERSONS
EXPOSED TO UNACCEPT-
ABLE NOISE LEVELS
INDICATOR






•
TREND
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
NO CHANGE
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
WORSENING
                                         LEGEND
                                            SATISFACTORY CONDITION
n                                            AREAS OF CONCERN;
                                            MORE ACTION NEEDED
                                            SERIOUS PROBLEM
                               230 SC-L.:,. >>
                                                       20
                                        60501*

-------