EPA 910 9 78 049A
SEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Washington
Environmental Quality
Profile
1978
• If* ;•#
•
-------
PREFACE
This is a report for the people of the State of Washington. Its purpose is to describe
progress in restoring and safeguarding an environment that is the envy of the nation.
Through technology, much progress has been made in recent years in reducing air and
water pollution from industrial and municipal sources. While problems remain, the long-
term challenge to a healthy and clean environment lies in the way we manage our
resources, in our forestry and agricultural practices, in urban land use and water planning,
and in the types of transportation systems we use.
While Federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have important
responsibilities, the prime responsibility for solving environmental problems has been
assigned to the States by Federal law. Keeping the faith of the businesses, industries and
municipalities that have voluntarily met their environmental responsibilities requires a
vigorous enforcement effort against those polluters that would unfairly profit by not
assuming theirs.
Looking ahead, it is clear that the Northwest must accommodate a growing population
and that this must be accomplished while maintaining a reasonable balance between
economic benefits and the need for healthful air, clean water, and the other unique
qualities of life that characterize the Northwest.
This report provides information gathered from a number of sources — State
environmental agencies, local government, various Federal agencies, and universities. The
assistance of these persons, institutions, and agencies is gratefully acknowledged.
Additional technical information can be provided by the Region 10 Office of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and is availalbe to any person who may wish to explore
a particular topic in greater depth. The Region 10 Office of EPA intends to issue future
reports with improvements and expansions on the information as appropriate. Comments
and suggestions for improvements are welcome.
Donald P. Dubois
Regional Administrator, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Seattle, Washington
December, 1978
-------
WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROFILE
CONTENTS
AIR QUALITY PROFILE
WATER QUALITY PROFILE ..
Rivers and Streams
Lakes
Marine Water
Drinking Water
NOISE PROFILE
SOLID WASTE PROFILE
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
SUMMARY
. 2
.12
..12
..23
..27
..29
.30
.31
.32
.33
Exhibits
Health Effects of Air Quality Standards
Violations (Table 1)
Air Quality Status Map - by County (Figure 1)
Annual Average Number of Days Health Standard
Exceeded-by Pollutant (Figure 2)
Annual Average Number of Days Health Standard
Exceeded - by Severity (Figure3)
Percent of Total Air Quality Violation Days
Attributable to Automobile Emissions
(Table 2)
Air Quality Status in Selected Urban Areas
(Table 3)
Air Quality Status and Trends (Figure 4)
Point and Area Sources - Paniculate
Emissions (Figure 5)
Point and Area Sources - Sulfur Dioxide
Emissions (Figure 6)
Point and Area Sources - Carbon Monoxide
Emissions (Figure?)
Point and Area Sources - Hydrocarbon
Emissions (Figure 8)
Criteria/Parameter Groups For the Water
Quality Index (Table 4)
Water Quality Map of Principal Rivers
in Washington (Figure 9)
Water Quality Status of Principal Rivers
in Washington (Figure 10)
Principal Rivers in Washington - Average
Water Quality Index (Figure 11)
Water Quality Trends - Washington (Figure 12)
Trends of Federal Criteria Violations
(Figure 13)
Principal Region 10 River Basins - Average
Water Quality Per River Mile (Figure 14)
Page Exhibits
2
4
7
8
10
11
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Water Quality Status of Principal Region 10
River Basins (Figure 15)
Water Quality Map of Principal Region 10
River Basins (Figure 16)
Water Quality Trends - Region 10 (Figure 17)
Suspended Solids Loading Graphs (Figure 18)
Factors for Evaluating Impairment of
Lakes (Table 5)
Trophic Status of Washington Lakes and
Reservoirs (Table 6)
Trophic Status of Major Recreational Lakes
(Figure 19)
Impairment Status of Recreational Lakes
(Figure 20)
Principal Washington Lakes and Reservoirs-
Impairment of Highest Beneficial Use
(Table 7)
Marine Waters of Washington: Status of
Classified Shellfish Growing Areas
(Figure 21)
Marine Waters of Region 10: Status of
Classified Shellfish Growing Areas
(Figure 22)
Washington Drinking Water Status
(Figure 23)
Percent of Washington Population Covered
by Noise Ordinances (Figure24)
Percent of Region 10 Population Covered by
Noise Ordinances (Figure25)
Percent of Population Served by State-
Approved Solid Waste Disposal Facilities
(Figure 26)
Status of Resource Recovery Projects and
Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites in
Region 10 (Figure 27)
Page
19
20
20
21
23
24
25
25
26
28
28
29
30
30
31
32
-------
AIR QUALITY
AIR QUALITY
Improving air quality in the Northwest has been a cooperative effort
among Federal, State and local environmental agencies, industry,
and a concerned and informed public. Since the 1970 Clean Air Act
Amendments, there has been a considerable expenditure of time and
money to find solutions to the most pressing air pollution problems.
National air quality standards have been established to ensure that
the goal of a clean and healthful environment is attained. The States,
with Federal assistance, have developed a variety of regulatory,
enforcement, and administrative programs in an attempt to reduce
pollutants to such a level that these air quality standards would be
attained and maintained. State efforts have been augmented by
Federal regulation of pollutants from stationary sources such as
power plants and factories and by the Federal program to reduce air
pollution emissions from motor vehicles.
Throughout the Northwest, State, Federal and local environmental
quality control agencies maintain monitoring networks to scientifically
measure air quality. The Seattle Regional Office of the Environmental
Protection Agency annually evaluates data submitted by these air
pollution control agencies. This analysis allows an assessment of the
degree to which the air quality of the Northwest has been changing
and the degree to which air quality standards are being achieved.
Overall, air quality in Washington, as well as the other states in
Region 10, has improved during the past five years.
TABLE 1
HEALTH EFFECTS OF AIR QUALITY
STANDARDS VIOLATIONS
Pollutant
Total Suspended
Particulates
(TSP)
Sulfur Dioxide
(S02)
Health Effect at Concentrations
above the Primary Standard
Aggravation of asthma and chronic
lung diseases, increased cough,
chest discomfort, restricted activity,
aggravation of heart and lung
disease symptoms in the elderly,
increased death rate;
Aggravation of asthma, aggravation
of heart and lung disease symptoms
in the elderly, increased lung illness,
increased death rate;
Air Quality Standards
The Clean Air Act of 1970 directed EPA to establish ambient air
quality standards for the principal and most widespread classes of air
pollutants as shown in Table 1. The standards are divided into two
categories: primary standards which are set at levels required to
protect the public health; and more stringent secondary standards
which are set at levels which would reduce other undesirable effects
of air pollution. The primary standards were established by evaluating
medical data and are designed to reduce adverse health effects from
paniculate matter, sulfur oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide,
photochemical oxidants, and nitrogen oxides. The health effects of
hydrocarbons are not listed in Table 1 because hydrocarbons, in
themselves, do not pose a direct health problem. Rather, they react
in sunlight to form oxidants. For this reason, the standards for
hydrocarbons serve as a way of controlling oxidants and for attaining
the oxidant standard.
Some pollutants exhibit both chronic and acute effects depending on
the duration of exposure and the concentration of the pollutant. For
this reason, the standards for some pollutants require the
concentration of the pollutant in the air to be averaged over various
lengths of time.
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Photochemical Oxidants
(03)
Oxides of Nitrogen
(NOX)
Interference with mental and
physical activity, reduced capacity
in persons suffering from heart and
other circulatory disorders;
Aggravation of asthma and chronic
lung disease, irritation of the eye
and of the respiratory tract,
decreased vision, reduced heart and
lung capacity;
Increased chronic bronchitis.
-------
AIR QUALITY
Measuring Air Quality
The average number of days per year in which the primary air quality
standards were exceeded in the period 1974 to 1976 has been used in
this report to characterize air quality. A three-year running average is
used to project trends because it minimizes year-to-year deviations
due to weather and climate.
For various reasons, including sampling technique requirements and
the cost of collecting air quality samples, data is not collected for all
days of the year, at all monitoring stations, and for all pollutants.
However, there is sufficient data to make reliable estimates of the
total days of standards violations for most types of pollutants.
Monitoring stations selected in each county for the three-year
average are those showing the greatest number of days exceeding
the standard. Accordingly, the figures are not representative of the
entire county in which the station is located. Attainment of the
secondary standards were not addressed in this report since the
major emphasis in most areas of the Northwest is still on attainment
of the primary health standards.
WASHINGTON AIR QUALITY
Figures 1, 2, and 3 on the next pages show various aspects of
Washington air quality.
In Figure 1, all the counties of the State have been color coded
according to the degree to which standards are being violated in at
least one monitoring site within the county. Counties shaded yellow
are exceeding one or more of the primary standards, while the
counties shaded blue are attaining all standards. Counties with green
shading are not currently being monitored.
Figure 2 on page 5 shows how often the primary standards were
exceeded. During the three-year period ending in 1976, data from
monitoring stations showed that 17 of Washington's 39 counties had
concentrations of pollutants that exceeded the primary air quality
standards.
Particulate matter (TSP) violations were the most widespread. The
sulfur dioxide standard (SO2) was exceeded in Clallam and Pierce
Counties. Spokane and King Counties recorded carbon monoxide
(CO) violations 28 and 24 percent of the time. Pierce, Yakima, and
Clarke Counties also recorded CO violations but for only a very small
percentage of the time. Oxidant (03) violations occurred in King,
Pierce, Clark and Spokane Counties.
Figure 3 shows the severity of violations for these same counties.
The degree of risk from exposure to pollution varies according to
both the concentration and the length of exposure time. As the
concentration increases above the primary standard, it eventually
reaches what is called the "alert" level, at which there is a
significantly higher health risk. Figure 3 shows that approximately 17
percent of all instances in which health standards were exceeded in
Washington, the concentrations were at or above the alert level.
Almost half of the violations at the alert level occurred in the more
populated or industrialized counties of King, Pierce and Spokane.
About 60 percent of the state's population live in these counties.
\
-------
AIR QUALITY
COUNTIES MEETING PRIMARY
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
COUNTIES NOT MEETING PRIMARY
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
COUNTIES WITHOUT CURRENT
MONITORING DATA
FIGURE 1
AIR QUALITY STATUS MAP — BY COUNTY
CLALLAM
SAN JUAN
JEFFERSON
GRAYS HARBOR
SKAGIT
WHATCOM
PACIFIC
LEWIS
CHELAN
WAHKIAKUM
MASON
KITTITAS
SPOKANE
WHITMAN
ADAMS
— LINCOLN
(EXCERPTED FOR CLARITY)
-------
AIR QUALITY
FIGURE 2
ANNUAL AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS HEALTH STANDARD
EXCEEDED — BY POLLUTANT
oc
Ul
a
tO
a
COUNTIES NOT MEETING AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FIGURES
ANNUAL AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS HEALTH STANDARD
EXCEEDED — BY SEVERITY
a.
LU
cc
>
a
CO O, TSP SO,
EXCEEDS PRIMARY
| EXCEEDS ALERT
/\ LI ^^B ^ r * M ^^^ ^^^^*^ ^^^ *"^^* ^^ ^^ ^^^^™
£>^6-$- A/ ^ > g & £ £ &
w///*//// *
.^
/
r
COUNTIES NOT MEETING AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
/// /
/// »*
v
-------
AIR QUALITY
A REGIONAL OVERVIEW
As shown in Table 3 on the facing page, air quality violations occur
in every State in Region 10. Standards for four of the major
pollutants were exceeded in the State of Washington for the three-
year period ending in 1976. Idaho and Oregon exceeded standards for
three of the major pollutants and Alaska exceeded standards for two.
Region 10 has relatively few heavily populated urban centers. There
are only 6.5 million total residents in the four states combined.
Where there are major urban centers, air pollution problems exist.
Violations in the 14 Region 10 communities shown in Table 3
accounted for 79 percent of all violation-days and 74 percent of all
alert level violation-days in the Region. While pollution is not
confined to urban areas, it is most severe where human activity is
heavily concentrated.
Much of Region 10's air pollution can be attributed directly to
automobile exhaust as shown in Table 2 on this page. Eighty percent
of standards violations in Oregon, 65 percent in Washington, 23
percent in Idaho and 50 percent in Alaska were due to carbon
monoxide and/or photochemical oxidants in urban areas. In turn,
80% to 90% of these pollutants can be traced to automobile
exhausts. Because over half of the Region's population lives in or
near the cities shown in Table 2, automobile exhaust must be viewed
as a significant public health problem in the Pacific Northwest and
Alaska. EPA is working closely with the States of Alaska, Idaho,
Washington and Oregon to reduce both emissions from vehicles and
the number of vehicle miles traveled in urban centers having high
carbon monoxide pollution levels.
Both western Oregon and Washington have oxidant concentrations
over the health standard. Control efforts in this area are just
beginning, because the creation of oxidants is an extremely complex
phenomena, involving reactions of hydrocarbons and other chemicals
to sunlight.
The suspended paniculate problem is widespread and results from
both industrial and non-industrial sources such as dust from roads
and streets, and home oil heating. Controls for suspended
particulates have been installed on many industrial plants, and some
plants are scheduled to reduce emissions in the near future. When
new facilities are constructed, the best available pollution controls are
required. Many localities need to reduce particulates from non-
industrial sources, but in some cases, solutions are technically or
economically difficult to achieve. Examples include grass burning in
western Oregon and eastern Washington, wind-blown dust, dust
from dirt roads, and the re-suspension of dust from paved roads. The
automobile is a significant, indirect contributor to some of these
problems.
In communities such as Tacoma, Washington, and Kellogg, Idaho,
air pollution is largely attributable to industry. Heavy metals and
particulate emissions from smelters have long been problems in these
areas.
Sulfur dioxide (S02) pollution is primarily caused by emissions from
large stationary sources, and controls are being installed as required
by law.
TABLE 2
PERCENT OF TOTAL AIR QUALITY
VIOLATION DAYS ATTRIBUTABLE TO
AUTO EMISSIONS *
Alaska
Anchorage
Fairbanks
Idaho
Boise
Oregon
Portland
Salem
Medford
Washington
Seattle
Spokane
Tacoma
Yakima
Region 10
50%
68%
88%
23%
96%
80%
96%
100%
77%
65%
99%
80%
55%
75%
54%
'assumes all CO and Ox violation days result from
automobile-related emissions but excludes auto
related particulates
-------
AIR QUALITY
TABLE 3
AIR QUALITY STATUS IN SELECTED URBAN AREAS
Pollutants Exceeding Standards Total Violation Days
Urban Areas
Carbon Photo Suspended Sulfur Primary
Monoxide Oxidants Particulates Dioxide Standard
Alert
Level
Alaska
Anchorage
Fairbanks
Sitka
Idaho
Boise
Kellogg
Pocatello
Soda Springs
Twin Falls
Oregon
Eugene
Medford
Portland
Washington
Seattle
Spokane
Tacoma
• • 240
• • 37
• • 108
• 24
• • • 467
• • 112
• 133
• • 83
• 65
• 29
... 169
• • • 18
• • • 57
• • • 55
... 355
• • • 98
• • 131
.... 22
69
6
28
10
143
23
17
50
32
7
43
3
26
8
62
8
19
2
\
-------
AIR QUALITY
AIR QUALITY TRENDS IN WASHINGTON
The trend in air quality is an indication of whether air pollution
control activities have been effective. Figure 4 shows trends in each
Washington county based on air monitoring records for the period
1974 through 1976. An upward arrow indicates that measured
concentrations of the specified pollutant appear to be increasing. A
downward arrow indicates that concentrations appear to be
decreasing. A horizontal arrow depicts unchanging conditions.
Overall, Washington's air quality improved between 1974 and 1976.
Where trends could be established, 11 counties showed worsening
air quality while 30 were either improving or remaining the same.
Figure 4 also shows whether air quality standards are being violated
in each Washington county. Blue boxes indicate that there is no
evidence that the specified air quality standard has been exceeded.
Yellow boxes indicate that a standard has been exceeded without
concentrations reaching the alert level, and red boxes show areas
where the alert level was exceeded. Where circles occur within the
box, the degree of attainment of standards was deduced from a
knowledge of pollutant sources rather than actual measurements. By
employing an extrapolation technique which uses population and
industrial concentrations from similar counties where standards
violations occur, three more counties (Columbia, Garfield and Ferry)
are added to the 17 listed in Figures 2 and 3 as having exceeded one
or more primary standards.
FIGURE4
AIR QUALITY STATUS AND TRENDS
COUNTY
/0it0A
ADAMS
ASOTIN
COLUMBIA
GARFIELD
GRANT
LINCOLN
SPOKANE
WHITMAN
CLARK
COWLITZ
LEWIS
SKAMANIA
WAHKIAKUM
CHELAN
DOUGLAS
FERRY
OKANOGAN*
PEND OREILLE
STEVENS
CLALLAM
GRAYS HARBOR
o
0
0
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
0
o
o
o
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
ISLAND
0
o
o
o
0
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
f\
0
o
0
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
°1
LEGEND
™
o
°'l
o
o
o
o
o
o
/-v
0
NO EVIDENCE PRIMARY
STANDARD EXCEEDED
EXCEEDS PRIMARY LEVEL
EXCEEDS ALERT LEVEL
DESIGNATION BASED
ON JUDGMENT
DECREASING STANDARDS
VIOLATIONS
LEVEL OR NO
APPARENT TREND
INCREASING STANDARDS
VIOLATIONS
INSUFFICIENT DATA
TO DETERMINE TRENDS
COUNTY
'Okanogan County's annual geometric mean for TSP exeeded the primary standard shown in Table 1, but did not have any single concentrations
In excess of the 24-hour standard.
-------
AIR QUALITY
SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION IN
WASHINGTON
The previous charts have expressed air quality in terms of the days of
standards violations. Another way of describing the problem is in
terms of the amount of pollution being put into the air and from
where it is coming.
Figures 5 through 8 show emissions in those Washington counties
which exceed standards. The emission totals are based on the latest
emission inventory information. In preparing these charts, emissions
from some sources had to be estimated and some of the smaller
sources have not been included. Also, emissions attributed to a
particular county may affect air quality in an adjoining county
because the source is located close to the county boundary. Overall,
however, the charts provide a good perspective as to the extent,
location, and sources of air pollution.
Suspended Participates
Sources of particulate emissions can be grouped into two major
categories: point sources, which are large stationary sources such
as factories and power plants; and area sources, such as from the
heating of homes and buildings, from transportation, and from wind-
blown dust. To date, particulate emissions have been controlled
mainly by installing equipment on industrial plants, reducing the
burning of the higher ash-content fuels, and paving roads to reduce
exceptional dust problems.
Figure 5 shows the distribution of particulate matter emissions by
source category. Point sources accounted for the bulk of particulate
production in two thirds of the counties, amounting to about 44,000
of the more than 68,000 total tons generated.
Area sources were responsible for the remaining 24,000 tons of
particulate matter and a large portion of this is due to "fugitive
dust". This includes such things as wind-blown dust, dust from dirt
roads and suspended dirt from paved roads.
FIGURES
POINT AND AREA SOURCES — PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
15,000
cc
Ul
>•
CC
UJ
Q.
5,887
5|674 I 1 POINT SOURCES
~1 I 1 (Top Figure)
• AREA SOURCES
(Bottom Figure)
4,221
1,556
NOTE:
Fugitive diut emissions not Included
COUNTIES NOT MEETING AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
-------
AIR QUALITY
While point sources of participates may be controlled with reliable,
relatively inexpensive technology, fugitive dust is responsible for a
large share of Washington's particulates problem. Thus, even though
the further control of point sources will reduce the frequency and
severity of violations, air quality violations will continue until area and
fugitive dust sources are also controlled.
Sulfur Dioxide
The principal causes of sulfur dioxide are the combustion of sulfur-
containing fuel in generating electricity and in certain industrial
operations. Sulfur dioxide emissions have declined due to the
substitution of lower sulfur fuels and installation of control equipment
at the sources. Curbing certain types of industrial production, when
weather conditions prohibit adequate dispersion of the pollutant, has
also been effective.
Figure 6 shows that approximately 82 percent of all sulfur dioxide
emissions in the counties exceeding standards come from point
sources. Sixty-six percent of the total sulfur dioxide is emitted in
Pierce County and most of this comes from the smelting and refining
operations in Tacoma.
Carbon Monoxide
Figure 7 shows the carbon monoxide emissions for Washington. The
private automobile is responsible for more than 90 percent of carbon
monoxide in those counties where the standard is not met. Carbon
monoxide emissions will be reduced as old autos are replaced with
ones that incorporate improved pollution control devices. Reducing
traffic in high density traffic corridors, reducing peaks in traffic,
improving vehicle maintenance, and reducing total vehicle miles
traveled through increased use of mass transit and carpooling, are
other means of lowering carbon monoxide levels.
Photochemical Oxidants and Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbon emissions and nitrogen oxides are critical factors in
establishing the cause of photochemical oxidants in the environment.
Photochemical oxidants (measured as ozone) are the product of
atmospheric reactions between hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen
in the presence of sunlight. Figure 8 shows hydrocarbon emissions.
Hydrocarbons, like carbon monoxide emissions, come mostly from
mobile or transportation sources, and these sources account for 57
percent of the total hydrocarbons emitted. The balance comes from
sources such as solvent and gasoline evaporation.
Nitrogen Oxides
Nationally, nitrogen oxides emissions have increased mainly because
of increased emissions from electric utility plants, and increased
industrial power generation. Emissions from electric utilities and
industrial sources have risen due to increased power demands and
little equipment has been installed on these sources specifically to
control nitrogen oxides. Emissions of nitrogen oxides from vehicles
have remained essentially constant since 1972 because control
devices have counterbalanced the increase in total miles traveled.
FIGURES
POINT AND AREA SOURCES — SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS
100,000
95,727
AREA SOURCES
(Bottom Rgure)
COUNTIES NOT MEETING AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
10
-------
AIR QUALITY
FIGURE?
POINT AND AREA SOURCES — CARBON MONOXIDE EMISSIONS
oc
UJ
Q.
CO
360,000
(Top Figure)
AREA SOURCES
(Bottom Figure)
COUNTIES NOT MEETING AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
FIGURES
POINT AND AREA SOURCES — HYDROCARBON EMISSIONS
100,000
I POINT SOURCES
(Top Figure)
\
AREA SOURCES
(Bottom Figure)
COUNTIES NOT MEETING AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
11
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
RIVER WATER QUALITY
In 1972, the United States Congress enacted amendments to the
"Federal Water Pollution Control Act" which stimualted new
cooperative Federal, State and local water quality improvement
programs. Since 1972, various regulatory, enforcement, grant, and
administrative programs have been developed to reduce pollutants
entering the Nation's waters. This section of the report provides
information on the current status and trends in water quality in the
State of Washington.
Ways of Measuring River Water Quality
Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, the States
established water quality standards to protect the public water supply
and the quality of water for wildlife, recreation, navigation,
agriculture, industry, and the propagation of fish and shellfish. The
Washington Water Quality Standards, like those of the other States
in Region 10, specify levels for parameters such as temperature,
dissolved oxygen, bacteria and turbidity in river water.
In order to provide a means for reliably measuring and comparing
water quality in the Northwest, a standardized set of parameters and
associated criteria has been selected. These criteria, termed "Federal
water quality goals" in the following discussion, are a synthesis of
the State standards, national criteria, information in the technical
literature, and professional judgment. The eleven parameters used to
measure river water quality in this report are listed and explained in
Table 4.
TABLE 4
CRITERIA/PARAMETER GROUPS1 FOR THE WATER QUALITY INDEX
Criteria/
Parameter Group
Temperature
Dissolved Oxygen
PH
Bacteria
Trophic
Explanation
Temperature of water influences
both the nature of life forms and the
rate of chemical reactions. Ex-
cessively high temperature is
detrimental to cold water fish.
Oxygen dissolved in water is
essential to the life of aquatic
organisms including fish. Low levels
of oxygen can be detrimental to
these organisms.
Measure of acidity or alkalinity of
water. Extreme levels of either can
imperil fish life and speed corrosion.
Bacteria indicate probable presence
of disease-related organisms and
viruses not natural to water.
Indication of the level of algal activ-
ity in water. Excessive activity is
characterized by very murky, turbid
water and nuisance-levels of algae
which impair recreational uses of
water. Algal decomposition process
can adversely affect dissolved
oxygen levels in water bodies.
Criteria/
Parameter Group
Aesthetics
Solids
Total Dissolved Gas
Radioactivity
Organic Toxicity
Inorganic Toxicity
Explanation
Refers to detectable oil, grease and
turbidity which is visually unpleas-
ant.
Dissolved and suspended material in
water. Excess dissolved solids
adversely affect water taste, in-
dustrial and domestic use. Excess
suspended solids adversely affect
fish feeding and spawning habits.
Measure of concentration of gases
in water. Can affect the metabolism
of aquatic life forms.
May be in water resulting from
radioactive waste discharges or
fallout. Excess levels could result in
a direct threat to aquatic and other
life forms.
Includes pesticides and other
poisons that have the same effects
and persistence as pesticides.
Heavy metals and other elements.
Excess concentrations are
poisonous to aquatic and other life
forms.
total of 80 criteria/parameters were evaluated and condensed to the eleven shown here. More detailed information will be provided as requested.
12
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
While water quality can be discussed in terms of the degree to which
each of these eleven parameters deviate from the selected criteria, it
is helpful to be able to express the quality of a stream or river by
means of a single, overall measure. In order to accomplish this, a
"water quality index" (WQI) has also been formulated. This index is
simply an aggregation of the eleven parameters shown in Table 4 and
provides index numbers ranging from 0 to 110. The way the WQI is
calculated is described in the insert on page 14. An index number
from 0 to 4 means the river water essentially meets Federal water
quality goals. A number between 4 and 11 means the river
provisionally meets goals, while a number above 11 means the water
fails to meet goals. In the graphs shown in this section of the report,
these index number ranges are colored blue, yellow and red
respectively.
THE QUALITY OF WASHINGTON'S PRINCIPAL
RIVERS
With some exceptions, water quality in the rivers and streams in
Washington meets the goals of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. Figure 10 shows that only four of the 22 rivers evaluated do not
meet the Federal water quality goals in at least part of their reaches.
Another eight have some reaches which provisionally meet the goals.
Washington's water quality monitoring program is one of the most
complete in the Region, and the status of most of the principal rivers
in the State is known.
Figure 11 expresses water quality in terms of the Water Quality Index
described above. Water quality tends to improve progressively from
east to west. Portions of four streams east of the Cascade
FIGURES
WATER QUALITY STATUS OF PRINCIPAL RIVERS
IN WASHINGTON
UPPER COLUMBIA It. Crab Cr.
FAILS TO MEET
FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
PROVISIONALLY MEETS
FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
UNKNOWN. DUE TO INSUFFICIENT DATA
MAJOR SURFACE WATERS
RIVER
la. Pend Oreille R.
Ib. Spokane R.
Ic. Okanogan R.
Id. Wenatchee R.
If. Yakima R.
2. LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER
2a. If alia Walla R./Touchet R.
2b. Lewis R.
2c. Cowlitz R.
3. LOWER SNAKE RIVER
3a. Palouse R.
4. Nooksack R.
5. Skagit R.
6. Stillaguamish R./N. & S. Fk.
SELECTED STREAM REACH LIMITS
8. Green-Duwamish R.
9. Puyallup R.
10. Nisqualh R.
11. Chehalis R.
7. Snohomish R./Skykomish R./Snoqualmie R. 12. Willapa R.
13
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
THE WATER QUALITY INDEX (WQI)
The WQI compares measured water quality during the last five
years with the recommended Federal criteria. The data used to
make this comparison come from various Federal, State and
local agencies and are stored in EPA's computer systems. A
number is calculated for every water quality sampling station
with sufficient data. Seventy-nine Washington stations were
used in this evaluation. Seasonal and other temporal data
biases are significantly reduced by time-weighting the WQI
calculation for each station. The final index number for each
station is a summation of standard violations for each
criteria/parameter group which are also weighted by the
severity of the violation. The station WQI number spans a scale
that may run from 0.0 (no measured evidence of pollution) to a
theoretical maximum level of 110.0 (severe pollution in all
eleven criteria/parameter groups at all times). Individual
reaches of most Northwest rivers fall below a WQI of 30, and
the average WQI for entire rivers is still lower.
Based on professional judgement as to the significance of the
values and known water quality status of regional streams, the
entire scale of 0 to 110 is divided into several ranges. An index
number greater than 11.0 (shown as red in the Figures) is
considered to be characteristic of streams that do not meet the
goals of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. An index
number less than 4.0 (blue) is considered to be equivalent to
minimally impaired conditions (meets goals of the Act). An
index number between 4.0 and 11.0 (yellow) is indicative of
streams which provisionally meet the goals of the Act. The
color green is used in the charts when the water quality status
is unknown due to an inadequate data base.
FIGURE 10
WATER QUALITY STATUS OF PRINCIPAL RIVERS IN WASHINGTON
V)
UJ
oc
UJ
E
400
300
200
100
NOTE:
Except where indicated, the river
miles shown are for the mainstem
of each stream only.
• DOES NOT MEET FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
(—I PROVISIONALLY MEETS FEDERAL
LJ QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
I UNKNOWN
14
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
Mountains—Crab Creek, Palouse, Walla Walla, Touchet and
Spokane Rivers (with an average index number greater than 11.0) do
not meet Federal goals for propagation of native fish and unrestricted
recreational use. However, approximately two-thirds (15) of the 22
streams evaluated meet Federal goals. Eleven of these streams are
located west of the Cascades and discharge directly into Puget
Sound or the Pacific Ocean. Three additional streams, the Lower
Columbia, Lower Snake and Yakima, have only a slightly higher
index number.
Generally, rivers on the east side of the Cascades show higher
concentrations of phosphorus and solids as well as higher
temperatures than those on the west side. This results, in part, from
intensive land use and agricultural water use. Crab Creek and the
Palouse, Walla Walla and Touchet Rivers lie mainly in agricultural
areas. During heavy runoff periods, problems occur from land
erosion. Low summer flows during the irrigation season account for
increased temperature and nutrients. The Spokane River, which
flows into Washington from Idaho, received a high Index rating
because of excessive heavy metals, bacteria and nutrient
concentrations. Sources in Idaho account for the heavy metals and
part of the phosphorus; however, the major portions of nutrients and
bacteria originate from the City of Spokane.
The lower Yakima River receives wastes from both agricultural and
urbanized areas. Excessive bacteria, nutrients, and solids account for
its "provisional" rating. The heavily populated Yakima urban areas
and the lower Yakima Valley irrigation return flows are mostly
responsible for these conditions.
Dissolved gas supersaturation is the most serious problem in the
Lower Columbia and the Snake Rivers during high flows because of
its catastrophic and widespread effect on salmonid populations.
Although this condition occurs naturally in some reaches, it is
worsened by discharges over the spillways of dams.
Streams located in the more populated, western part of the State
generally have good water quality. Nevertheless, some exhibit
excessive bacteria and turbidity concentrations during various times
of the year. Glacial runoff accounts for the high turbidity levels which
periodically occur in some Puget Sound streams but in others the
source is erosion from forest and agricultural land.
FIGURE 11
PRINCIPAL RIVERS IN WASHINGTON -
AVERAGE WATER QUALITY INDEX
20.0
18.0-
16.0-
14.0-
< 12.0H
8.0H
6.0-
4.0-
2.0-
T,
ft
NOTE:
1) The Water Quality Index (WOI) la an
average value over a stream length,
calculated only from those stream
portions where data is available.
2) Except where indicated, those portions
Included in the WQI value are on the
mainstream of each stream, only.
o
DOES NOT MEET FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
PROVISIONALLY MEETS
FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL QUALITY
GOALS
15
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
RIVER WATER QUALITY TRENDS
Data from 38 water quality sampling points equally distributed in
rivers throughout the State have been used for water quality trend
evaluations. Trends in the data from these stations are considered to
be representative of the general water quality in the State of
Washington. As shown in Figure 12, water quality in rivers
throughout Washington for the period of 1972 through 1976 appears
to be generally improving. Improvements seem to be concentrated in
those streams which are classified as "Provisionally Meeting Federal
Goals." Little apparent improvement has occurred yet in those
steams which previously have been failing to meet the goals.
The majority of stations consistently meeting Federal criteria are
located in three major areas—the coastal rivers, upper portions of
Puget Sound rivers, and most tributaries to the Columbia River
Basin, where population is sparce and silviculture is the major
activity. The majority of the water quality stations that provisionally
meet Federal criteria or do not meet these criteria are located in the
semi-arid eastern portion of the State, where high intensity of water
and land use for agricultural purposes exists.
Figure 13 provides details for eleven broad parameter classes
described in Table 4. The blue color indicates that measurements for
the indicated parameter produced no evidence of a violation of
Federal criteria for water suitable for fish, wildlife, and recreation.
Yellow and red indicate minor and major violations of the criteria.
The green indicates that there was inadequate information for making
a judgment. An upward-pointing arrow within a box indicates that
the concentrations of the contaminant are rising, or that the
frequency of violations is increasing. A downward-pointing arrow
indicates declining problems and a horizontal arrow indicates that no
significant change has occurred over the five-year period. The trends
represent the average condition of the river evaluated.
FIGURE 12
WATER QUALITY TRENDS — WASHINGTON
U)
O
•z
cc
o
O
5
H
UJ
O
CC
UJ
Q.
100 r-
80
60
40
20
DOES NOT MEET
FEDERAL QUALITY
GOALS
PROVISIONALLY
MEETS GOALS
MEETS GOALS
1972
16
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
A decrease in heavy metals (INORG TOX) and bacteria levels
(BACTERIA) is the main reason for improved water quality in
Washington rivers and streams. Most of this reduction is the result of
pollution control efforts in the State. The aesthetics category
(AESTH) which includes oil, grease and turbidity appears to be
increasing mainly in Puget Sound streams. While these increases are
due in part to land use activities, a significant amount of turbidity is
due to runoff from glacial areas.
Generally, the most common violations come from excessive nutrient
concentrations, highly turbid waters and high bacteria counts.
However, dissolved gas supersaturation is the most serious form of
pollution in the Lower Columbia and Snake Rivers. While this
condition has been prevalent during the last few years, low river
waterflow in 1977 kept the levels to a minimum. Violations of trophic
criteria (TROPHIC) are more common in eastern Washington waters;
bacteria and heavy metals violations are found in western
Washington, and the Spokane and Yakima areas. Aesthetic problems
appear in eastern Washington and Puget Sound.
It is likely that many categories shown as having inadequate data
would meet Federal water quality goals if data were available.
However, the lack of pesticide data (ORGANIC TOXICITY), as shown
in Figure 13, is of concern, especially in agricultural areas where
pesticide application is prevalent.
FIGURE 13
TRENDS OF FEDERAL CRITERIA VIOLATIONS
£
RIVER
t
4•
f/*////////
RIVER
//*////////
LEGEND
MEETS FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
PROVISIONALLY MEETS
FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
DOES NOT MEET FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
UNKNOWN DUE TO
INSUFFICIENT DATA
NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS
INCREASING
NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS
DECREASING
CONDITION STABLE
17
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
A REGIONAL OVERVIEW
A Water Quality Index (WQI) is used in Figure 14 to compare 25
major Pacific Northwest River Basins within Alaska, Idaho, Oregon,
and Washington.
Figure 15 depicts the water quality by river mile for each river basin
and Figure 16 shows similar information on a regional map.
As Figure 15 indicates, portions of approximately one-third or nine of
the river basins do not meet Federal water quality goals and another
four only provisionally meet them. Most streams in Alaska fall into
the unknown category. However, many of these waterways are
located in remote areas unaffected by man. Future reports will show
the results of water quality monitoring programs now in progress in
Alaska.
Regional water quality appears to be worse in the more arid and
agriculturally-oriented parts of the Region. Of the nine rivers which
do not meet Federal water quality goals (Klamath, Bear, Spokane,
Lower Columbia, Willamette, Yakima, and the three Snake Basins)
only the Spokane and Willamette Basins owe their high rating to
industrial activities. In the Spokane Basin, water quality is affected by
intense mining and smelting in the Coeur d'Alene, Idaho area and a
municipal discharge in the Spokane, Washington vicinity. Water
quality in the Willamette River Basin is affected by municipal and
industrial discharges in the small Tualatin River tributary; however, its
average WQI rating is so close to 4.0 that the Basin is considered to
be meeting Federal water quality goals. Major coastal and Puget
Sound rivers and the northeast river basins. Upper Columbia, Clark
Fork/Pend Oreille, and Kootenai have relatively good water quality,
with a few exceptions.
FIGURE 14
PRINCIPAL REGION 10 RIVER BASINS -
AVERAGE WATER QUALITY PER RIVER MILE
14.0
12.0-
10.0-
8.0
6.0-
4.0-
2.0-
©©
©0
©
©
NOTE:
The Water Quality Index (WQI) is an
average value over a stream length,
calculated only from those stream
portions where data \s available
o
©©
DOES NOT MEET FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
PROVISIONALLY MEETS FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
INSUFFICIENT DATA, HOWEVER PRE-
SUMED MEETING FED. QUALITY GOALS
Sfts
18
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
Although it is known that some streams in Alaska have localized
water quality problems near major population centers and in the more
remote areas where placer mining activities are occurring, data for
most areas is non-existent. The WQI, therefore, is somewhat
conservative for the State since the calculations do not include these
localized pollutants. The vast majority of fresh water in Alaska is
considered to be of good quality.
The most prevalent criteria violations in Region 10 are: excessive
concentrations of phosphorus and nitrogen, high nutrient levels
resulting in eutrophication; suspended solids; temperature; and low
dissolved oxygen levels associated with agricultural activities within
the Region. High suspended solid levels from natural origins such as
glaciers, mostly in Washington and Alaska, add to the difficulty in
determining the actual causes of violations. High bacteria levels and
pollutants that affect aesthetics (oil, grease and turbidity) account for
most violations in the vicinity of large population areas.
Inorganic toxicants in the form of heavy metals are extremely high in
the Spokane River Basin and are also present in moderate amounts
in the Upper Snake Basin tributaries. Supersaturation of dissolved
gas periodically occurs in the Lower Snake and Columbia Rivers from
high riverflows passing over dams. Because of reduced riverflow, this
problem has been less severe in the last few years.
An overall review of water quality trends in Region 10, shown in
Figure 17, indicates some improvements in streams that provisionally
met Federal goals between the years 1972 and 1976, and minimal
improvements in streams identified as not meeting the goals. Alaska
rivers are not included in the trend evaluation since adequate water
quality data does not exist at this time.
Changes in Regional water quality over the last five years indicate
that programs to control municipal and industrial waste discharges
have reduced the level of bacteria and oxygen degrading materials.
However, dissolved gas saturation, suspended solids, temperature,
nutrients, organic and inorganic toxicants which make up the
majority of the problems, are relatively unaffected by these programs.
Programs to identify and control nonpoint sources within the Region
must be implemented before further significant improvements in
Regional water quality can be expected.
FIGURE 15
WATER QUALITY STATUS OF PRINCIPAL REGION 10
RIVER BASINS
DOES NOT
MEET FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
1. Only the significant streams
within each basin arc Included In
the mileage totals shown.
2. The color green represents
Inadequate, or no water quality
data. It can be assumed, however,
that the vast majority of Alaska
stream miles identified on this
chart meets Federal quality goals.
. , PROVISIONALLY
J MEETS FEDERAL
*—' QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
19
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
MAJOR SURFACE WATERS
AND DRAINAGE AREAS
1. ARCTIC SLOPE DRAINAGE
2. NORTHWEST ALASKA DRAINAGE
3. UPPER YUKON RIVER
1. TAN AN A R.
5. LOWER YUKON R.
6. KUSKOKWIM R.
7. BRISTOL BAY DRAINAGE
8. KENAIKNIK DRAINAGE
FIGURE 16
WATER QUALITY STATUS OF PRINCIPAL
REGION 10 RIVER BASINS
NOTE: Stat* of Alctka it r«pr*t*nt«d at approximately 30% of true seal*
9. SUSITNA R
10. COPPER R.
DOES NOT MEET FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
PROVISIONALLY MEETS FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL QUALITY GOALS
UNKNOWN. DUE TO INSUFFICIENT DATA
MAJOR SURFACE WATERS
1. KLAMATH R.
2. BEAR R.
3. UPPER SNAKE R.
4. PORTNEUF R.
5. MIDDLE SNAKE R.
6. BOISE R.
7. OWYHEE R.
8. MALHEUR R.
9. PAYETTE R.
10. LOWER SNAKE R.
11. SALMON R.
12. GRANDE RONDE R.
13. CLEARIVATER R.
14. UPPER COLUMBIA R.
IS. ST. JOE R.
16. COEUR D'ALENE R
17. SPOKANE R
18. YAKIMA R.
19. LOWER COLUMBIA R
20. UMATILLA R.
21. JOHN DAY R.
22. DESCHUTES R.
23. WILLAMETTE R.
24. SANTIAM R.
25. COWUTZ R.
26. ROGUE R.
27. UMPQUA R.
28. W1LLJPA R.
29. CHEHAUS R.
30. SNOHOMISH R.
31. GREEN/DUWAMISH R
32. SKAGIT R.
33. NOOKSACK R
I SELECTED STIEAM IEACH UNITS
FIGURE 17
WATER QUALITY TRENDS-REGION 10
V)
g
I
UJ
O
tr
HI
a.
DOES NOT MEET
FEDERAL QUALITY
GOALS
PROVISIONALLY
MEETS FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
MEETS FEDERAL
QUALITY GOALS
NOTE:
Data based upon evaluation
of 84 monitoring stations
within Region 10 (excluding
Alaska).
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
20
YEAR
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
SOURCES OF RIVER WATER POLLUTION IN
WASHINGTON
The previous charts show that suspended solids, plant nutrients, and
oxygen-consuming materials have the most significant impact on
water quality in Washington's streams. The causes of these problems
are varied. All occur naturally, and under certain conditions the
natural contribution can be the major cause of the pollution.
However, they are also generated by man's activities such as point
source discharges from urban or industrial areas or as nonpoint
sources from various land use activities. The contributions from all of
these sources, and the resulting effects, can be significantly altered
by seasonal changes in streamflow, water temperature, and other
factors.
Suspended Solids
Suspended solids are a general class of both organic and inorganic
materials, such as algae, having a specific gravity very close to that
of water. This characteristic prevents rapid settling of the material
and promotes suspension and transportation over long distances. In
excessive quantities, these materials can discolor the water, reduce
light penetration, and, with gradual settling, smother fish-spawning
areas.
The organic portion of the suspended solids is degradable and often
leads to excessive oxygen demands. Suspended solids frequently
carry high concentrations of nutrients and toxic materials, such as
pesticides, which are ultimately released to the water.
FIGURE 18
SUSPENDED SOLIDS LOADING GRAPHS
State of Washington
GREEN RIVER
CHEHALIS RIVER
SPOKANE RIVER
560-
oc
o
09
Q. 40.
JFMAMJJASONO
co
a «.
J FM AM J J A S O ND
*
YAKIMA RIVER
LEGEND
MEAN MONTHLY AMBIENT LOADINGS
MEAN FLOW
| PS/NPS CURVE - This curve gives a general indica-
tion of the point source vs. nonpoint source loadings
expressed as a percentage.
NOTE
Note that me logarithmic scale tends to greatly de-
emphasize the variations shown, thereby demanding
considerable care In Interpreting the graph*.
21
-------
RIVER WATER QUALITY
Streamflow and erosion play a major role in creating suspended
solids. Figure 18 presents graphical comparisons of four rivers for
1976. Total suspended solids in the streams were compared on a
monthly basis with those suspended solids contributed by municipal
and industrial sources.
The pattern that emerges from this comparison emphasizes the
strong influence streamflow and geology have on amounts of
suspended solids. Three of the four rivers evaluated contain a high
volume of suspended solids throughout the year. High riverflows and
erosion appear to be responsible. The highest flows and suspended
solids levels occur in the areas where agriculture and silviculture
activities are the predominant land use. Extreme flows do not occur
on the Green/Duwamish River; therefore, the erosion process is not
as great as the other streams evaluated.
In the streams studied, direct industrial and/or municipal waste
discharges are an insignficant source of suspended solids. The
exception to this occurs in the Green/Duwamish River where
suspended solids loadings from municipal and industrial sources
account for approximately 20 percent of suspended solids in the river
during October and November.
Nutrients
High concentrations of plant nutrients, primarily nitrogen and
phosphorus, can lead to excessive growths of floating and attached
algae which clog small streams, deplete oxygen when they decay,
and generally create aesthetic and nuisance conditions. These effects
can be especially severe in smaller bodies of water. For the most
part, only the eastern, agriculturally-oriented streams in Washington
have phosphorus levels that exceed Federal criteria. As with
suspended solids, there are a variety of point, nonpoint, and natural
sources which contribute to the overall nutrient levels. Irrigation
return flow and other agricultural uses are primarily responsible for
high phosphorus levels in the Palouse River, Walla Walla River, and
Crab Creek. A mixture of municipal, industrial and agricultural
activities contribute to high phosphorus levels in the Yakima and
Spokane Rivers.
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD)
The consumption of oxygen by bacteria feeding on organic wastes
has historically been a major source of water pollution both in
Washington and throughout the country. BOD is used as a measure
of either the pollution potential of a waste or the pollution load in a
stream. Excessive BOD concentrations result in diminished oxygen
levels in steams and lakes with adverse impacts on fish populations
and other biological activity. A variety of point and nonpoint sources
can contribute to BOD loadings.
The oxygen levels in most of the Washington streams evaluated in
this report are not currently adversely affected by high BOD
concentrations. In the past, however, dissolved oxygen depresssions
caused by organic discharges have occurred in the Palouse, Yakima,
.Spokane and Chehalis Rivers. Municipal waste discharges were
mostly responsible in the Spokane and Chehalis Rivers. Municipal
discharges were partly responsible for the organic load in the Palouse
and Yakima Rivers; irrigation, livestock, and septic tank drainage
contributed much of the remainder.
Past water quality control efforts in Washington have concentrated
largely or elimination of point sources of organic pollution. With
some localized exceptions, these discharges have been reduced
significantly or eliminated. For example, new waste treatment
controls presently under construction and a proposed new collection
system installed, should dramatically improve dissolved oxygen levels
in the Spokane River. Further efforts to improve oxygen levels in
streams and reservoirs must focus on reducing nonpoint source
contributions of organic matter and plant nutrients.
THE RIVER WATER QUALITY OUTLOOK FOR
WASHINGTON
Some improvements can be anticipated in the next three to five
years.
A reduction in pollutants entering the Spokane River should occur
within the next few years, resulting from a combination of advanced
waste treatment for the City of Spokane and additional waste
treatment which is going into effect on the Idaho side of the border.
Additional improvements in water quality may be anticipated later
with the control of stormwater overflow for Spokane.
An improvement in water quality should also occur in the Yakima
River due to upgraded treatment for municipal and industrial
discharges. A reduction in the dangerously high levels of dissolved
gas supersaturation should occur in the Lower Snake and Columbia
Rivers as the result of spillway modifications at many of the major
dams on these rivers.
Additional improvement in the quality of rivers east of the Cascades
is doubtful in the near future since most of the remaining pollutants
are associated with intense land and water use, reservoir conditions
and natural runoff. Steps to solve these problems remain to be
defined, but programs are presently underway to identify the
improved management practices needed. However, several years will
be required to implement these programs.
The outlook in the western portion of the State is more diffiuclt to
assess. The effects of increased population, the need for additional
treatment of municipal and industrial waste discharges, the presence
of toxic substances, and increased potential for oil spills occurring in
the marine waters of Puget Sound, lead to the conclusion that little
improvement in overall water quality for western Washington is in
the offing for the near future. Localized areas, however, should
continue to show improvements.
The major goals of water quality management in Washington at this
time are protection and preservation of the existing good water
quality while developing and implementing methods which will
continue to effect improvements in poor quality areas.
22
-------
LAKE WATER QUALITY
LAKE WATER QUALITY
Lakes and reservoirs play a major and vital role in Washington's
water quality picture. They affect the State's economy through
recreational uses such as fishing, swimming, and boating, as well as
through agriculture and water supply. Power, navigation, irrigation
and flood control are major benefits derived'from dams and reservoirs
constructed throughout Washington to support and protect the life
and livelihood of its inhabitants.
Measuring Lake Water Quality
Although a numerical "water quality index" has not been developed
for lakes as for rivers, lake quality can be characterized in two ways:
trophic status and the degree of impairment of beneficial use.
While eutrophication, the process of aging, occurs naturally in lakes
and impoundments, man's activities may accelerate this process,
resulting in "cultural eutrophication". Highly eutrophic bodies of
water are characterized by dense algal blooms, floating mats of
vegetation, and a murky appearance. Algae are naturally found in
every body of water; however, when stimulated by abundant
nutrients, sunlight, and warm temperatures, they multiply rapidly to
become a nuisance to recreational users and seriously affect water
quality for other uses.
Plant nuisances may directly curtail or eliminate water recreation
activities such as swimming, boating, and fishing; impart tastes and
odors to water supplies; and hamper industrial and municipal water
treatment. These nuisance growths can also cause toxic conditions
which adversely affect other aquatic life in the lakes. Possibly the
greatest effect of eutrophication on water quality is the consumption
of dissolved oxygen when algae die, sink to the bottom of the lake,
and are decomposed by bacteria. This process reduces dissolved
oxygen levels and can adversely affect fish and other aquatic
inhabitants.
Water bodies with very little algae are said to be oligotrophic (often
called pristine). Lakes are said to be mesotrophic if they have
moderate algae productivity and meso-eutrophic if they are
approaching fully eutrophic conditions.
In the case of use impairment, swimming, fishing, boating and
aesthetics may be considered. An evaluation system which yields an
impairment score is shown in Table 5.
In this report, lake water quality has been assessed by totaling the
individual use ratings shown in table 5. The rating for each factor for
minimum or no impairment is one, and the most severe impairment is
rated three. Final ratings range from a low of four (minimum or no
impairment), to a high of twelve (significant impairment).
Professional judgment was used to determine the degree of
impairment where data were not available.
TABLE 5
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING IMPAIRMENT OF LAKES
Recreational
Use
Swimming
None
Criteria Score
Very low bacteria 1
Degree of Impairment
Moderate
Criteria Score
Moderate bacteria 2
Significant
Criteria Score
Unhealthy bacteria 3
Fishing
Boating
Aesthetics
levels (Fecal coli-
forms geometric mean
less than 50 per
100ml)
No adverse condi-
tions. Healthy
fish population.
Less than 10% of
surface area affected
by aquatic weeds
Objects visible in
water to depth of
10 feet or more and
low phosphorus
(Secchi Disc at 10
feet; total phosphorus
of less than 10 ug/l)
levels (Fecal coli-
forms 50 to 200 per
100 ml)
1 Slightly adverse
conditions. Slight
reduction in fish
population.
1 10 % to 30 % affected
Objects visible from
1.5 to 10 feet and
moderate phosphorus
level (Secchi Disc
at 1.5 to 10 feet;
total phosphorus
10 to 20 ug/l)
levels (Fecal coli-
forms greater than
200 per 100 ml)
Adverse conditions.
Significant reduction
in fish population.
More than 30%
affected
Objects not visible
beyond 1.5 feet or
high phosphorus level
(Secchi Disc at less
than 1.5 feet; total
phosphorus greater
than 20 ug/l)
SCORE
(No uses impaired)
5-8
(All uses moderately
impaired)
9-12
(All uses significantly
impaired)
23
-------
LAKE WATER QUALITY
TROPHIC CONDITIONS OF WASHINGTON'S
LAKES
Of the 19 lakes and reservoirs in Washington (see Table 6) which
have at least 10 square miles of surface area (6,400 acres), one
already is eutrophic and another nine are meso-eutrophic—well on
the way to becoming eutrophic. These waters are all located in the
eastern part of the State in either agricultural areas (Moses Lake and
Potholes Reservoir), or are part of the Columbia and Snake River
reservoir systems. These lakes and reservoirs are sinks for natural and
manmade nutrients.
Nine other lakes are either oligotrophic (relatively pristine) or
mesotrophic (moderate algal productivity). Lake Chelan and Ross
Lake, classified as oligotrophic, are located high in their respective
watersheds, where population is sparse and land use activity is
minimal. The remaining lakes and reservoirs, classified as
mesotrophic, are experiencing a small degree of algal activity but at
this time are not considered to have serious problems.
High phosphorous contributions from sewage and industrial
discharges and from fertilizers applied to surrounding lands have
accelerated the natural lake eutrophication process in Washington.
USE IMPAIRMENT
Table 7 depicts the degree of impairment of recreational lakes in
Washington. Of the 30 most-used Washington recreation lakes, eight
have a significant or moderate degree of impairment while the
remaining 22 have little impairment.
In general, lakes and reservoirs classified as severely or moderately
impaired are receiving municipal, industrial, or agricultural wastes.
Some are also showing effects from shoreline residential growth.
The majority of the more pristine lakes, with the exception of Lake
Washington and Lake Sammanish, are located in the less developed
portions of the State—usually at high elevations in their respective
drainage basins.
A REGIONAL OVERVIEW
There are 145 lakes and reservoirs within Region 10 that equal or
exceed 10 square miles in surface area and thousands of other
smaller lakes and reservoirs. Each plays an important role in the
ecosystem of the Pacific Northwest and Alaska.
Many Regional lakes and reservoirs are at or approaching a level of
eutrophication unsuitable for their intended uses. Exceptions are the
Alaska lakes, most of which are in remote areas.
Figure 19 on page 25 presents a summary of trophic status of the
Regional lakes by state.
TABLE 6
TROPHIC STATUS OF WASHINGTON LAKES & RESERVOIRS
(AT LEAST 10 SQUARE MILES IN AREA)
Lake or
Reservoir
Surface
Area in
Square
Miles
TROPHIC STATUS1
Meso-
Eutrophic Eutrophic Mesotrophic Oligotrophic
Lake Roosevelt 123
(Grand Coolee Reservoir)
Lake Wallula 53
(McNary Reservoir)
Lake Chelan 52
Potholes Reservoir 44
Banks Lake 39
Lake Umatilla 41
(John Day Reservoir)
Lake Washington 35
Wanapum Reservoir 23
Ross Lake 18
Little Goose Reservoir 16
Lake Entiat 15
(Rocky Reach Reservoir)
Wells Reservoir 15
Ice Harbor Reservoir 13
Rufus Woods Lake 12
Priest Rapids Reservoir 12
Lake Ozette 12
Lower Granite Reservoir 11
Moses Lake 11
Lower Monumental
Reservoir 10
1 Source of Data:
1. National Reservoir
2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3. EPA, Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
4. Washington State University
5. University of Washington
6. Grant County PUD
7. Chelan County PUD
24
-------
LAKE WATER QUALITY
FIGURE 19
TROPHIC STATUS OF MAJOR RECREATIONAL LAKES
50.0
18.0
(0
S 12.0
CC
0
Z 10.0
X
Z 8.0
£ 6.0
SU 4.0
_J
2.0
44.7
EUTROPHIC
I MODERATELY
| | EUTROPHIC (MESOTHOPHIC)
NON-EUTROPHIC
(OLIGOTROPHIC)
UNKNOWN STATUS
ALASKA
IDAHO
OREGON
WASHINGTON
FIGURE 20
IMPAIRMENT STATUS OF RECREATIONAL LAKES
O
£
<
a
1
UJ
§
u.
0
OC
UJ
ED
Z
<
0
H
u.
0
UJ
0
CC
UJ
a
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
SIGNIFICANT IMPAIRMENT
MODERATE IMPAIRMENT
LITTLE, OR NO
IMPAIRMENT
UNKNOWN CLASSIFICATION
Data based upon evaluation
of 120 Region 10 lakes.
ALASKA
IDAHO
OREGON WASHINGTON
25
-------
LAKE WATER QUALITY
Alaska, the least populated State, has the largest percentage of non-
eutrophic (oligotrophic) lakes and even the moderately eutrophic
lakes are probably the result of natural causes. About one-third of
Idaho's lakes and reservoirs are still non-eutrophic; however, the
remaining lakes are either moderately eutrophic or eutrophic because
of intense land and water use in the more populated and
agriculturally-oriented portions of the State. Oregon and Washington,
the most populated states in Region 10, have the lowest percentage
of the non-eutrophic lakes and reservoirs. Even though the eutrophic
condition of some of these bodies of water may result from natural
causes, intense recreational use, residential development, and
agricultural use east of the Cascade Mountains has accelerated the
eutrophication process.
A review of the 120 lakes within Region 10 that have the highest
recreational use in each state indicates that the majority have only
limited recreational impairment. Figure 20 shows the impairment
breakdown by state. The water quality of only two lakes in the State
of Washington is considered to be significantly impaired with
seventy-five percent showing little or no impairment.
In Idaho 30 percent, and in Oregon 12 percent of the lakes show
moderate impairment of the highest beneficial uses. Most of the
impaired Oregon lakes and reservoirs are in the semi-arid portion of
the State. Those in Idaho are in the southern portion of the State.
In almost every case, moderate or significant impairment is the result
of intense recreational use of lakes which are near populated areas.
The more pristine lakes and reservoirs are situated away from these
areas, many times in the higher elevations. The challenge for the
future will be to maintain the existing good quality lakes while
upgrading the poorer quality ones.
Name
Silver Lake
Moses Lake
Liberty Lake
Lake Wapato
Lake Sacajawea
Green Lake
Capitol Lake
Potholes Reservoir
Lake Quinault
Lake Cushman
Crescent Lake
Lake Whatcom
Ozette Lake
Merwin Lake
Lake Tapps
Lake Washington
Lake Sammamish
Ross Lake
Lake Chelan
Lake Wenatchee
Kachess Lake
Keechelus Lake
Cle Elum Lake
Baker Lake
Osoyoos Lake
Lake Roosevelt
(Grand Coulee Res.)
Banks Lake
Lake Wallula
(McNary Reservoir)
Park Lake
Deep Lake
TABLE 7
PRINCIPAL WASHINGTON LAKES AND RESERVOIRS
Impairment of Highest Beneficial Use
Surface Recreational Use Impaired1
Area
(Acres) Swimming Fishing Boating Aesthetics
3,000
7,000
700
28
61
256
270
28,000
3,700
4,000
5,100
5,000
7,800
4,000
2,300
22,000
5,000
11,500
33,500
2,500
4,500
2,500
4,800
3,600
3,000
79,000
25,000
19,000
350
66
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Final
Rating
9
9
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Source of Data:
1. National Reservoir Research
2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
3. EPA, Corvallis Environmental Research Laboratory
4. Washington State University
5. University of Washington
6. Grant County PUD
7. Chelan County PUD
26
-------
MARINE WATER QUALITY
MARINE WATER QUALITY
Its vast coastal and estuarine waters make the State of Washington
one of the most flourishing commercial and recreational areas in the
country. The majority of the State's urban centers and industrial
development occurs on or near these marine water areas, primarily
on the southeastern shore of Puget Sound and in the Grays Harbor
vicinity.
Marine waters of the State support international shipping, shellfish
production and recreational uses such as boating and fishing. It is
important that the quality of these waters be maintained.
Measuring Marine Water Quality
Marine water quality determinations are based upon specific
microbiological, chemical and toxicological criteria established by the
U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the National Shellfish
Sanitation Program. Waters free of fecal contamination, industrial
waste, radionuclides and biotoxins are considered safe for edible
shellfish production, and are classified as "Approved for Commercial
Shellfish Harvesting." Waters which generally meet the criteria but
are subject to occasional closure resulting from seasonal increases in
population, freshwater runoff, or temporary malfunctioning of waste
treatment facilities are classified as "Conditionally Approved." Waters
found to be contaminated, or suspected of being contaminated,
which would produce shellfish unsafe for human consumption are
classified as "Closed to Commercial Shellfish Harvesting."
Assessing water quality in marine water is a difficult, time-consuming
and expensive task due to the complexities of tidal variations
fluctuating currents and unpredictable mixing patterns. However, the
condition of shellfish such as oysters, clams, and mussels can be
used to assess marine water quality. Shellfish concentrate disease-
causing bacteria and viruses as well as toxic chemicals, radionuclides,
and biotoxins from the waters in which they live. Since shellfish
reflect concentrations of domestic, industrial, and agricultural wastes,
they can be used as practical long-term indicators of water quality
and the effectiveness of pollution control efforts at specific locations.
WASHINGTON'S MARINE WATERS
Over the last five years, there have been significant improvements in
marine water quality of Washington as a result of waste treatment
programs. Bellingham Bay has experienced a dramatic reduction in
bacteria levels. Dissolved oxygen levels in Everett Harbor and Port
Gardner have increased and toxic sulfite waste liquor concentrations
have decreased. Pacific oyster larvae again can survive in Port
Gardner and Port Angeles where toxic discharges have been
reduced.
Approximately 229,000 acres of commercial estuarine and marine
shellfish-growing waters in Washington have been classified by the
Washington State Department of Social & Health Services (Figure
21) as potential shellfish-growing areas.
Of the 229,000 acres surveyed, 68 percent are currently classified as
"Approved for Commercial Harvesting," 11 percent are "Conditionally
Approved," and twenty-one percent (49,000 acres) are
classified as "Closed" and cannot be used to produce shellfish for
human consumption. There appears to be a direct relationship
between residential-industrial development and the percentage of
growing waters closed to harvesting. Sizeable percentages of
estuarine and marine waters located in more populated or
industrialized areas—Grays Harbor, northern Puget Sound, and
central Puget Sound—are closed or only conditionally approved.
Bacteria levels resulting from municipal sewage treatment plant
effluents, septic tanks, poor drainage, and seasonal increases in
freshwater runoff are primarily responsible for restrictions. Most of
Washington's approved waters—Willapa Bay, Hood Canal, Pacific
beaches and parts of other areas—are located in relatively
undeveloped locations.
Certain northern and ocean beaches are closed each year to sports
harvesting from April 1st to October 31st because of the possibility of
increased levels of paralytic shellfish poison (PSP), a naturally-
occurring biotoxin produced on the West Coast by microscopic
marine algae. This phenomenon is not manmade.
Marine water areas which are currently under waste discharge
abatement programs are: Inner Bellingham Harbor and Port Angeles
(North Puget Sound); Port Gardner and Elliott Bay (Central Puget
Sound); Inner Commencement Bay (South Puget Sound) and Grays
Harbor (Washington Coast).
THE REGIONAL OVERVIEW
A total of 349,300 acres of commercial shellfish-growing areas (Figure
22) has been classified by agencies in Oregon, Washington, and
Alaska. This represents approximately two percent of the classified
growing waters in the Nation. Seventy-three percent of the Regional
growing area (254,100 acres) is classified as approved; nine percent
(32,900 acres) conditionally approved; and 18 percent (62,300 acres)
closed.
Most of the closed growing areas are due to fecal contamination or
the great potential for such contamination resulting from nearness to
municipal sewage treatment facilities serving populated areas. The
conditionally-approved areas are primarily characterized by excessive
fecal contamination occurring as a result of seasonal increases in
freshwater runoff from agricultural and logging activities, as well as
the occasional malfunctioning or bypassing of sewage treatment
plants.
Population growth and associated sewage wastes appear to pose the
greatest threat to approved shellfish growing areas in Region 10.
Because of the small size of Oregon's shellfish industry and the
generally undeveloped nature of Alaska's clam resources, changes in
Washington State's shellfish-growing area classification would
probably have the greatest regional economic impact. The effect of
reductions in the size of Washington's approved growing area may
be mitigated by the industry's ability to maintain current production
levels on somewhat less acreage. Nevertheless, the closure of key
growing areas in southern Puget Sound or Willapa Bay would have
an immediate adverse impact.
27
-------
MARINE WATER QUALITY
FIGURE 21
MARINE WATERS OF WASHINGTON
STATUS OF CLASSIFIED SHELLFISH GROWING AREAS
100
90
« 80
111
O 70
O 6°
10
O 50
Z
W 40
O
X 30
20
10
/
APPROVED FOR COMMERCIAL
SHELLFISH HARVESTING
CONDITIONALLY APPROVED FOR
COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH HARVESTING
CLOSED TO COMMERCIAL
SHELLFISH HARVESTING
Areas depicted represent only those
portions of the total estuarine and
coastal areas that have been classified
by the Washington State Department of
Social & Health Services
O
tc
a.
a.
-------
DRINKING WATER QUALITY
WASHINGTON DRINKING WATER
Public Water System Program
The drinking water coming into most homes in the Northwest today
is generally considered safe, mainly because of the high standards set
by public water supply systems. However, potential contamination of
drinking water supplies by the careless use of chemical compounds
and the unsafe disposal of toxic wastes requires vigilance.
In 1974, the United States Congress enacted the Safe Drinking Water
Act. The Act gives EPA the primary responsibility for establishing
national drinking water standards but it is intended that the states
assume responsibility for implementing programs to ensure the
standards are met. The State of Washington assumed this
responsibility in March 1978. State personnel have been added to
help implement the State's regulations and provide technical
assistance to operators of the State's approximately 3800 public
water systems which come under jurisdiction of the Safe Drinking
Water Act.
The national drinking water standards contain maximum allowable
levels for various contaminants and require water systems to monitor
(sample and analyze) their water on a periodic basis for determining
compliance with these contaminants.
The national standards went into effect in June 1977, and
bacteriological and turbidity monitoring was required to commence at
that time. All of the State's 2500 community water systems are
required to monitor for bacteriological contamination; approximately
40 percent of the systems are in compliance with this requirement. In
addition to bacteriological monitoring, the State's 150 community
water systems which utilize surface water are also required to
monitor for turbidity. About 40 percent of the surface water systems
are in compliance with this requirement. This information is
presented in Figure 23-A.
As is the case in most states, smaller drinking water systems
experience more obstacles in achieving compliance with drinking
water regulations. This is attributable to many factors, including
limited financial capabilities and difficulties in obtaining qualified
operators. In the future, additional regulatory follow-up will be
conducted with the smaller systems. A breakdown by water system
size for compliance with bacteriological monitoring is shown in Figure
23-B.
Groundwater Protection Program
The Safe Drinking Water Act has also established a program for
protecting underground sources of drinking water. States with a
significant number of injection wells having a high potential for
groundwater contamination will be required to regulate such wells.
Initially, none of the four states in Region 10 will be designated as
requiring an underground injection control program; however, in the
future, one or more may be so designated.
Another feature of the national program is referred to as the "sole
source" designation. The Safe Drinking Water Act authorizes EPA to
designate aquifers which are an area's sole or principal drinking water
source for special protection. In February 1978, the Spokane Valley-
Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer was designated for "sole source"
protection. This aquifer provides water for about 40,000 Idaho
residents and 300,000 Washington residents in the Coeur d'Alene and
Spokane areas.
"Sole source" designation requires EPA to review Federal financially-
assisted projects to ensure that such projects are designed and
constructed so as to protect the aquifer. Memoranda of
Understanding are being developed between EPA and the major
Federal agencies providing financial assistance to projects in the
Spokane Valley-Rathdrum Prairie area. Projects submitted for EPA
review include housing developments and commercial and industrial
facilities, as well as major projects such as the Northern Tier Pipeline
Project and municipal sewerage projects.
FIGURE 23
2500
KEY
TOTAL NUMBER
OF SYSTEMS
SYSTEMS MONITORING
IN JUNE 1978
1000
I 150
60
2000
KEY
TOTAL NUMBER
OF SYSTEMS
SYSTEMS IN COMPLIANCE
WITH BACTERIOLOGICAL
MONITORING
REQUIREMENTS
WASHINGTON
DRINKING WATER
STATUS
750
500
250
BACTERIOLOGICAL TURBIDITY SYSTEMS SERVING SYSTEMS SERVING
MONITORING MONITORING LESS THAN 400 MORE THAN 400
COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE COMPLIANCE WITH BACTERIOLOGICAL
A COMPLIANCE WITH BACTERIOLOGICAL AND o MONITORING REQUIREMENTS BY
M TURBIDITY MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ° WATER SYSTEMS SIZE
- JUNE 1978
29
-------
NOISE
NOISE
Sound, so vital a part of our existence, 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 occupational
noise and hearing loss, but also includes community noise, which
affects us physiologically and psychologically by causing nervousness
and tension.
In view of these facts. Congress passed the Noise Control Act of
1972 which gives EPA authority to set standards on new products
that are major sources of noise (cars, trucks, etc.) and existing noise
sources which need national uniformity of treatment (interstate
railroads, trucks and aircraft). However, the primary responsibility for
control of noise rests with state and local governments.
Technical assistance is available from EPA in areas such as:
developing model legislation; reviewing proposed legislation and
regulations; and training of state and local officials in writing laws
and ordinances and in noise enforcement measurement techniques.
EPA has thus far provided assistance to Oregon and Washington in
developing noise regulations, assistance to the cities of Anchorage,
Seattle and Portland in developing noise control ordinances, and in
the monitoring of noise levels from railroad locomotives, ferries and
auto and motorcycle racetracks.
The State of Wash'ngton has passed regulations which establish
maximum receivable levels of noise originating from designated
property types. Regulations also exist which limit noise emissions
from motor vehicles and motorcycles.
Several cities including Seattle, Olympia, and Colfax, and counties
including King and Kitsap have enacted environmental and/or
vehicular ordinances similar to the Washington State regulations.
Seattle intends to write future noise ordinances for seaplanes, racing
vehicles, construction activities and vehicles which use rails or tracks.
Other cities are presently considering ordinances of their own.
Figure 24 indicates the percent of Washington's population covered
by noise ordinances, while Figure 25 shows the same information for
the Region as a whole. Neither of these charts reflect the
effectiveness with which the ordinances are implemented or
enforced.
FIGURE 24
PERCENT OF WASHINGTON POPULATION
COVERED BY NOISE ORDINANCES
POPULATION 3,409,000
z
o
ID
O.
O
Q.
1U
o
cc
UJ
0.
FIGURE 25
REGION 10 POPULATION COVERED
BY NOISE ORDINANCES
POPULATION 6,515,000
g
i-
_i
O.
O
a.
Z
UJ
u
cc
Ul
0.
30
-------
SOLID WASTE
SOLID WASTE
Waste management deals with problems ranging from health and
environmental hazards to the efficiency of collection operations. The
diverse nature of wastes (dead animals, mercury-rich industrial
sludges, dredge spoils, abandoned cars, septic tank pumpings,
residential solid waste, infectious hospital wastes, demolition, debris,
feedlot wastes, etc.) makes the challenge of waste management as
complex as its sources.
Improper disposal methods can pollute the land, air or water. For
example, burning 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
characteristics 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 stipulated by Federal law as a national goal.
One method of measuring progress in this area is to determine the
number of people served by adequate disposal sites. Figure 26
presents this information for the years 1972 through 1976. In 1976,
some 1,090,900 people or 32 percent of Washington's population was
being served by State-approved solid waste disposal sites. This is an
increase of 100 percent in the past five years.
The recovery of energy and other resources from waste is being
considered and developed by more and more areas as problems and
costs of other acceptable disposal systems have skyrocketed. In
Region 10 some 13 resource recovery projects are planned,
committed or are under construction. The largest are in the Seattle
and Portland areas where "fuel from refuse" facilities are being
planned. The status and location of resources recovery projects in
Region 10 is shown in Figure 27.
Washington is planning a State-owned hazardous waste disposal
facility in a low rainfall area in the south-central part of the State.
Resource recovery is also beginning to be implemented within the
State with facilities being planned or under construction at the Naval
facilities in Kitsap County, in Cowlitz County, Whatcom County.and
at Seattle and Tacoma.
Disposal of hazardous wastes in Region 10 is becoming a significant
problem. Currently there are two State-licensed disposal facilities
within the Region, one in Idaho and the other in Oregon.
Under new Federal legislation (The Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act), only sites which meet EPA or equivalent standards
will be able to receive hazardous wastes for disposal.
FIGURE 26
PERCENT OF POPULATION SERVED BY STATE-APPROVED
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES
o
H
Q.
O
Q.
U.
O
H
Ul
O
tr
w
a.
100
90
80
70
60
SO
40
30
20
10
0
1976
31
-------
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
FIGURE 27
STATUS OF RESOURCE RECOVERY PROJECTS AND
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SITES IN REGION 10
NOTE: Slat, of Alaska ii r.pr.i.nted at approximately 30% ol tru> stale
RESOURCE RECOVERY PROJECTS
PLANNING
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
EXISTING
PLANNED
o
HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Chemicals are pervasive in our environment. They are in our food,
water and air. While chemicals are beneficial, some may produce
long term, adverse effects if allowed to enter the environment
improperly.
The need for vigilance in the Pacific Northwest is highlighted by the
following:
• Lead levels in a school yard in Kellogg, Idaho were so high, that
soil had to be removed.
• Arsenic from a copper smelter near Tacoma, Washington is
suspected to be responsible for increased lung cancer in smelter
workers.
. • A spill of copper concentrate into the Nisqually River resulted in
severe damage to fishery on this major Washington river.
• A ruptured transformer spilled over 250 gallons of the dangerous
chemical Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) into the Duwamish River
in Seattle, and approximately 800 establishments in Region 10
currently use PCB containing transformers or capacitators.
Of increasing concern is the possible relationship between some
chemicals and cancer. The American Cancer Society reports that at
least 75% of the cancers in people are induced by factors in the
environment.
Recent Federal legislation has addressed the hazardous substances
problem. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) provides for
32
controlling the manufacture, processing, distribution, use and
disposal of chemicals. The Resources Conservation and Recovery Act
provides for proper disposal of hazardous waste. These laws,
combined with other EPA legislative responsibilities, should reduce
the potential for future adverse impacts.
EPA is developing a strategic plan which will focus the Region's
attention on high priority chemicals. Following the identification of
chemicals manufactured and used in the Region, impacts and
methods of control will be assessed. The strategy will utilize Federal,
state and local control measures.
This report has addressed environmental quality along media
lines —air, water, noise and solid waste. Increasingly, actions taken in
each of these areas must consider the impacts of hazardous
materials. For example, higher levels of treatment of air and water
waste discharges generate increased volumes of sludges and other
solid wastes for disposal on land. These sludges contain toxic and
hazardous materials as a result of new discharge restrictions and
pretreatment requirements for industries discharging to municipal
wastewater treatment systems.
Data to define the nature and extent of environmental problems in
the Northwest resulting from toxic and hazardous chemicals are
lacking; however, EPA is currently gathering data to depict the
extent of the problem.
-------
SUMMARY
SUMMARY
Air Quality: Most of the health-related air quality standards are
being met for many of Washington's counties. Moreover, there has
been an overall trend toward better air quality in recent years.
However, in the more densely populated areas of the State, air
pollution levels frequently exceed the air quality standards. About 60
percent of Washington's population lives in the Seattle-Everett,
Tacoma, and Spokane metropolitan areas where both the primary
health standards and the critical alert level standards are frequently
exceeded. Long-term improvements in participate matter pollution
lie in controlling the amounts of area and fugitive dust. Even though
point sources such as power plants and factories currently account
for the bulk of participate matter emissions, these emissions can
eventually be greatly reduced through reliable and relatively
inexpensive technology. The non-point sources such as home
heating, transportation, and wind-blown dust present the greater
long-term challenge. On the other hand, over 80 percent of the
sulfur dioxide emissions in the State of Washington come from
point sources and most of this from smelter operations where
controls are needed. Emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon
monoxide, and nitrogen oxides are, for the most part, related to
automobile exhaust. Pollution from these contaminants will be
reduced to the extent that vehicles are better maintained, vehicle use
reduced through mass transit and car-pooling, areas of intense
emissions due to traffic volume and congestion eliminated, and
emission control devices become more prevalent in the population of
vehicles in use. Hydrocarbon emissions can also be reduced by
reducing the evaporation of petroleum products which account for
over 40 percent of the emissions. The continued installation of
control equipment at electric generating facilities and at certain
industrial facilities will reduce nitrogen oxide emissions.
River and Stream Water Quality: With some important
exceptions, Washington's river and stream water quality is meeting
Federal goals, and the State's water quality is among the best in the
Nation. Only four of the State's principal rivers do not meet these
goals in at least some portions of the river. Water quality tends to
improve progressively from the eastern to the western portions of the
State. Rivers east of the Cascade Mountains, such as the Crab
Creek, the Palouse, the Walla Walla, the Touchet, and the Spokane
suffer from high concentrations of phosphorous, dissolved solids,
and temperature. Generally speaking, this is the result of intensive
land use or agricultural water use. Excessive levels of suspended
solids, plant nutrients, and oxygen-consuming materials have the
most significant impacts on Washington's water quality. For
suspended solids, direct industrial and municipal sewage discharges
are insignificant sources of the problem in comparison to erosion and
runoff from silviculture and agriculture operations.
Long-term improvements in suspended solid contamination of
Washington's rivers lies in improved land management practices. In
the case of nutrients, the causes are irrigation return flow and other
agricultural operations and, in some areas, industrial and municipal
sewage discharges. As with nutrients, control of oxygen-
consuming materials must address nonpoint sources. With some
exceptions, the point sources of the past (sewage and industrial
discharge)have been eliminated. In the eastern part of the State, little
improvement in river quality can be expected until problems
associated with runoff and intensive land and water use are
addressed. In the western part of the State, increasing population,
increasing use of toxic substances, and oil spill potential must be
overcome before further improvements can be attained. Certain local
areas, however, will greatly benefit from waste treatment facilities.
Overall, the principal goals of water quality management in
Washington at this time are the protection and preservation of the
existing good water quality while seeking solutions to poor quality
areas.
Lake Water Quality: Lake eutrophication occurs naturally but is
accelerated by man's activities. It is estimated that, of the 19 lakes
and reservoirs in Washington which have at least ten square miles of
area, one is currently eutrophic and nine others are well on the way
toward being eutrophic. Of the 30 most used recreational lakes in the
State, eight have at least a moderate degree of impairment. Both
eutrophic conditions and use impairment correlate closely with the
degree of land use in the vicinity of the lake or the existence of
intense recreational use. Implementation of improved land
management practices for agricultural lands in the vicinity of many of
the lakes would result in improvements.
Marine Water Quality: Over the past five years, there have been
significant improvements in marine water quality in Washington due
to waste management programs. Still, over 30 percent of the
classified shellfish harvesting grounds in the State are either
considered unsafe or temporarily closed, depending on conditions,
from time-to-time. Current problems result from municipal sewage,
septic tank seepage, poor drainage, and seasonal fresh water runoff.
Drinking Water Quality: Washington has assumed the
responsibility for implementing the national drinking water
regulations. In June 1977, the national regulations required the
State's 2SOO community water systems to commence monitoring for
bacteriological contamination. As of June 1978, less than half of the
systems were in compliance with this monitoring requirement;
however, of those monitoring, most were in compliance with
contaminant limits.
Noise: The State of Washington, as well as several cities, has
passed regulations which establish maximum levels of noise.
Currently, 30 percent of the State's population is covered by local
noise ordinances that are in keeping with State regulations. This
represents an increase of 100 percent in the last three years.
Solid Waste: Approximately one-third of Washington's population is
served by solid waste disposal methods that meet standards for good
solid waste management. This represents an increase of 100 percent
during the last five years. The disposal of highly hazardous wastes
and resource recovery operations are also among the principal
problems to be addressed.
Hazardous Substances: Nearly every area of environmental quality
just summarized is impacted by the use of chemicals. New laws and
regulations have resulted from public concern over the adverse health
and environmental effects of hazardous substances; however, it is an
area in need of better data, research and integrated control efforts.
•frGPO # 696-829
------- |