United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
December 1979
Washington
Environmental
Quality Profile

-------
Preface
This is the third annual report to the people of the State of Washington regarding the status
of their environment. Information presented has been compiled by the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) from numerous sources in the state and local government,
especially the State Department of Ecology, as well as from other institutions.
The report discusses progress in environmental preservation that has been made to date,
addresses some of the related problems and issues faced by the people of the state,
and identifies some solutions to those problems and issues.
The Northwest is growing—more industry attracts more people—and the results of
that growth are not always environmentally beneficial. Consequently, the state faces a
challenge: accommodating increased growth while retaining its greatest resource, a
beautiful and healthy environment.
Naturally, the traditional industrial and muncipal pollution sources are of concern, but many
SL the region's problems are due to nontraditional sources of pollution. Agricultural
ana forest practices can significantly affect water quality especially on rivers with consistently
low stream flows. Many chemicals, including some pesticides and herbicides have serious
health effects that have been recognized only recently. Urban development itself, separate
from industry, creates diverse pollution problems affecting the air, water, and land.
While Washington State and the Northwest may be seen as relatively environmentally
"clean" when compared to other parts of the nation, continuing efforts are necessary to
maintain that status, as well as to better understand and resolve current regional problems. An
informed public is essential to this effort, and it is hoped that this document will provide a
better perspective on some crucial resource management issues facing the state as well
as the nation.
Space limits a complete presentation of many complex technical issues, therefore the
reader interested in additional information is invited to contact the Region 10 office of
EPA in Seattle for other publications that contribute to increased understanding of specific
topics. Comments and suggestions are also solicited regarding improvements to future issues
of this publication.
Donald P. Dubois
Regional Administrator, Region 10
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Seattle, Washington
September, 1979

-------
Washington Environmental Quality Profile
Errata Sheet
Page	Change
2	Figure 2
3	Figure 4
4	Figure 7
5	Figure 8
Figure 9
11	Figure 13
14	Figure 16
17	Figure 19
19	Figure 21
Color in chart should be
light blue - secondary
standards exceeded.
Spokane County is brown -
alert levels exceeded for CO.
Key for "standards attained"
should be dark blue.
Vancouver CO box should be
light brown - "primary standards
exceeded".
Key for "secondary standards
exceeded" should be light blue.
Key should be corrected as follows:
"unacceptable" should be brown,
"no monitoring" should be gray,
and a blank box should be added
indicating "no data available for
trend analysis".
Final portions of bars for
the Spokane and Klamath Rivers
should be gray.
Green Lake, Lake Sammamish and
Long Lake should all be light
brown.
Key for "conditionally approved"
should be light brown; "closed
to commercial harvesting" should
be dark brown.

-------
Contents/Summary
1	Air Quality
In 1978, most areas in Washington met air quality
standards, and there was relatively little change in
air quality from the previous year. Seven urban
areas exceeded standards for total suspended
particulates, as did a number of rural counties
where fugitive dust was a problem. To attain
standards, point source and area source controls
have been either implemented or are planned.
Sulfur dioxide has been brought under control in
recent years, but carbon monoxide standards,
especially in Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane, Yakima,
and Vancouver, may not be attained before 1987,
even with improved emission controls. Seattle,
Tacoma and Vancouver also exceeded standards
for ozone, which is subject to the same controls
as carbon monoxide.
7	River Water
Washington's major rivers are generally of good
quality, and the six year trend has been stable.
Existing pollution arises from point sources such
as industries, which are controlled through
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
permits and non-point sources such as
agriculture, forestry, and urban stormwater runoff,
which are controlled by areawide wastewater
management programs. The water quality
standards most often exceeded are those for
temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, bacteria,
nutrient levels, and solids; improvements are
anticipated by 1983, the target year for "fishable,
swimmable" rivers.
16	Lakes
In 1978, Vancouver Lake, Moses Lake and Silver
Lake had significant water quality problems
which impaired their recreational use. Degraded
aesthetic conditions, mainly due to algae growths,
were the principal water quality problem in
these and other lakes. Stormwater runoff from
urban and agricultural lands, sewage discharge
from urban residential areas, and irrigation return
flows are thought to be responsible, and a variety
of measures have been implemented to restore
lake water quality in Washington.
Marine Water	19
About one-fifth of Washington's valuable
commercial shellfish growing areas were closed
to shellfish harvest in 1978. The principal
closures were in Central Puget Sound, where
sewage and industrial discharge have contaminated
marine waters. Similar sources closed other Puget
Sound and coastal shellfish areas. Improved
wastewater treatment plants and industrial
discharges are expected to improve marine
water quality.
Noise	21
Noise control measures in Washington have
been directed at industrial and commercial
stationary sources and at motor vehicles. Land
use controls have also been used. Although the
EPA and the Washington Department of Ecology
have played a role in noise control, enforcement has
largely been left to local authorities.
Drinking Water	22
The water systems that serve over three-quarters
of the population using community water systems
in Washington comply with regulations for
bacterial contamination. However, the compliance
status of over half the systems in the state is
unknown due to inadequate data. The state has
developed several programs to improve drinking
water quality, particularly that of small community
water systems. In addition, EPA has instituted
measures to preserve or improve ground water
quality.
Solid Waste and Hazardous
Substances	24
Past problems with traditional methods of solid
waste disposal have prompted the use of new
approaches in Washington. In particular, material
leached from landfills is being more carefully
controlled and treated, and resource recovery
programs have been implemented. Special
attention has been paid to waste tires, wood, and oil.
Production, use, and disposal of hazardous
materials has been a source of concern. However,
both mandatory and voluntary programs have been
implemented to better manage these materials.
EPA requires stringent monitoring of radioactive
materials and pesticides, although the state
has primary enforcement duties for controlling
these substances.

-------
Summary of Environmental
Indicators for Washington
MEDIA INDICATOR
CURRENT
STATUS
TREND
Air Quality
Number of areas exceeding standards
8
Little change
River Water
Quality
Percentage of monitoring stations meeting
water quality goals (based on worst 3 months)
50%
Little change
Lake Water
Quality
Percentage of major recreational lakes with
little or no use impairment
50%
Little change
Marine Water
Quality
Percentage of classified shellfish harvesting
waters open
68%
Little change
Drinking Water
Quality
Percentage of population served by water supplies
in compliance with regulations for bacterial
contamination
77%
Improving

Percentage of community water supplies in
compliance with regulations for bacterial
contamination
17%
Improving
Noise
Percentage of population living in areas with
local noise control standards meeting state
objectives
100%
Little change

Degree to which noise control regulations are
enforced
Fair
Improving
Solid Waste
Disposal
Number of resource recovery or recycling
facilities available
29
Improving

Number of hazardous waste handling sites
4
Improving

-------
Air
Quality
The task of improving air quality in the
Northwest continues to be a cooperative
effort among Federal, state, and local
environmental agencies, industry, and a
concerned, informed public. Since the 1970
Clean Air Act, considerable investment has
been made in time and money in the search
for solutions to the most pressing pollution
problems. However, much remains to be
done, and this section gives some insight into
the types of air quality problems faced by the
citizens of Washington State.
Air Quality Standards —
Their History and Definition
The Clean Air Act of 1970 directed EPA to
establish National Ambient Air Quality
Standards ("ambient" refers to outside or
environmental conditions rather than indoor
quality). In 1977, amendments to the Act
required that all standards be met as soon as
possible and practical. In the case of primary
(health-related) standards, the new deadline
is December 13, 1982. An extension to
December 31, 1987 can be granted for
carbon monoxide and ozone.
that exceed established "primary standards"
pose a threat to public health. Exceeding
"secondary standards" has detrimental
impacts on agriculture and results in
deterioration of many consumer products. If
the pollutant concentration reaches the
"alert level," individuals, industry, and
government should take immediate action to
protect human health by curtailing outdoor
activities, use of automobiles, and certain
industrial operations.
In Washington, standards have been set and
concentrations established which meet or
exceed Federal standards for five major
pollutants. Table 1 lists the effects on health
and property that are the normal result of
exceeding those standards.
Table 1.
Effects of Major Air Pollutants on
Health and Property
POLLUTANT	HEALTH EFFECTS
How Air Quality is Measured
Air quality data are collected at monitoring
stations located throughout Washington,
primarily in concentrated population or
industrial centers (the most likely sources
of air pollution). Monitoring sites are
designated in this report as commercial/
industrial, residential, or rural. However, air
pollution can originate away from the
monotiring site. High pollutant levels in a
residential area, for example, do not
necessarily indicate the source is located
in that area. Not all pollutants are
monitored continuously at all stations, and
monitors are not located in all counties,
PROPERTY EFFECTS
Suspended
Particulates
Sulfur Dioxide
Ozone
Correlated with increased bronchial Corrodes metals and concrete;
and respiratory disease,	discolors surfaces; soils exposed
especially in young and elderly. materials; decreases visibility.
Carbon Monoxide
Upper respiratory irritation at low
concentrations; more difficult
breathing at moderate concentra-
tions (3000 ug/m3), correlated
with increased cardio-respiratory
disease; acute lung damage at
high concentrations.
Physiological stress in heart
patients; impairment of
psychomotor functions; dizziness
and headaches at lower concen-
trations; death when exposed to
1000 ppm for several hours.
Irritates eyes, nose, throat;
deactivates respiratory defense
mechanisms; damages lungs.
Combines with hydrocarbons in
the presence of sunlight to form
photo-chemical smog; irritates
eyes, nose, throat; damages
lungs.
Corrodes and deteriorates steel,
marble, copper, nickel, aluminum,
and building materials; causes
brittleness in paper and loss of
strength in leather; deteriorates
natural and synthetic fibers;
"burns" sensitive crops.
Corrodes limestone and concrete
structures.
Deteriorates rubber and fabrics;
corrodes metal; damages
vegetation.
Corrodes metal surfaces;
deteriorates rubber, fabrics,
and dyes.
The more highly concentrated a pollutant is, Nitrogen Dioxide
the worse its effect on humans and their
environment. Because some pollutants have
both chronic and acute effects on health,
standards are based on their average
concentration over various lengths of time
with a margin of safety included. Pollutants

-------
primarily because of the high cost of
installation and operation. However, all
large metropolitan aras are monitored.
EPA has estimated the percentage of days
during which concentrations of the various
pollutants exceeded the standards in
Washington during 1978, then compared
this information with 1977 data to obtain
short-term indications of changes in air
quality.
Air Quality in Washington
Areas where a combination of high
emissions and weather conditions cause
air quality standards to be exceeded have
been designated as "non-attainment."
Currently, eight areas in Washington fall in
this category. In addition, the original
determination of non-attainment was based
on data for 1975 through 1977; therefore,
areas that are presently classified as
attainment may have exceeded the
standards in 1978. It is difficult to
determine precise boundaries for areas in
which standards are exceeded, especially
for ozone because it is transported for
long distances. For that reason, county
boundaries are used for display purposes
although only a portion of the county may be
affected by the pollutant.
Washington's major air pollutants and their
sources are discussed in the following
sections along with the progress being made
to meet air quality standards.
Suspended Particulates
Suspended particulates are solid or liquid
particles of different sizes and have health
effects that vary with size and composition.
Particulates can aggravate asthma and
chronic lung diseases and increasing cough-
ing and chest discomfort. Some particulates
can be toxic or cancer-causing (lead or
asbestos particles, for example). Particulate
pollution may interfere with visibility, injure
vegetation, and increase cleaning and
maintenance costs in numerous sectors of
the economy.
About two-thirds of the particulate emissions
in Washington come from what are called
"point sources" which are easily identified
sources of emissions such as smokestacks.
The remaining third cannot be pinpointed to
a specific source. Examples of what is termed
"fugitive" dust or emissions include dust
created by certain industrial and agricultural
operations, and vehicles on unpaved roads. In
rural areas with little major industrial develop-
ment and low population density, this fugitive
dust is composed mostly of natural soil
particles and is believed to be less harmful to
the health. For this reason, rural areas are
considered to be attaining air quality
standards although particulate standards are
exceeded. This is true for most of eastern
Washington.
Figure 1 shows the Washington areas that
exceeded suspended particulate standards,
i.e., at least one monitoring site in the county
exceeded one or more of the standards for
total suspended particulates in 1978. Aside
from counties where rural fugitive dust
accounts for exceeding TSP standards
(shown as brown), most violations are
focused on seven urban areas. Data from
these areas are charted in Figure 2, which
shows the percentage of days monitored on
which samples exceeded the standards.
In the Seattle, Tacoma and Spokane areas,
fugitive dust from unpaved roads and
construction sites and point-source industrial
emissions caused TSP standards to be
exceeded. However, each year from 1974
through 1978 less than 1% of the
population in the Seattle-Tacoma metro-
politan area was exposed to pollution
levels above the annual primary standard.
The main source of particulates in the
Vancouver area has been traced to the
Carborundum Company, a processor of
inorganic minerals. In the Port Angeles,
Longview, and Clarkston areas, suspended
particulate levels are largely due to fugitive
dust from log yards and emissions of the
forest products industry. A major source of
pollution for the Clarkston area is
emissions from pulp mill operations in
Lewiston, Idaho.
Figure 1.
Air Quality Status —
Suspended Particulates
Figure 2.
Percent of Observed Days Suspended
Particulates Exceeded Standards
AREAS
MONITORED
Seattle c/i
c/i
Tacoma „
OBSERVED DAYS EXCEEDED (%)
20 40 60 80 100
Port
C/I
Angeles
Vancouver c/i
Clarkston c/i
c/i
Spokane

i


(33/122)
[27/118)




J



(3/61)
]



(1/60)
~



(7/60)

i
f i

(34/58)
(26/99)
(18/64)
(7/57)




ii



ii
1

C/I: COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL
R: RESIDENTIAL
| STANDARDS ATTAINED
| SECONDARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
H PRIMARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
| ALERT LEVELS EXCEEDED
| NO MONITORING OR INSUFFICIENT DATA
m STANDARDS EXCEEDED DUE TO FUGITIVE DUST
NOTE: Number in parentheses represents total number of
days exceeding standards per number of observation days.
2

-------
UWHARY
U S Environmental Protection A.g«mej
Corv.-l] Environmental Research Lab.
200 S.W 33lh SUeut
Corvallia, Oregon 97330
To date, the concern in Washington State
has been to reduce emissions from point
sources. Emphasis has been placed on
pollution control equipment for industrial
plants and on reducing the ash content of
fuels used in these plants. For example, the
Carborundum Company in Vancouver is
making production process modifications and
installing additional control equipment that
will significantly reduce particulate emissions.
This, coupled with other efforts to control
particulate emissions, should enable the
Vancouver area to comply with standards
by 1980. Paving roads and parking lots,
street cleaning programs, and more stringent
controls on slash burning are measures
employed by the other nonattainment areas
to control area sources of suspended
particulate pollution.
Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur dioxide is formed when coal or oil
containing sulfur is burned or when sulfur is
burned in industrial process. This gas can
combine with moisture in the air to form
sulfuric acid. Breathing air containing sulfur
dioxide can produce adverse health effects
similar to those described above for
suspended particulates. Rain that comes in
contact with sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere
corrodes buildings, is harmful to vegetation,
and can deteriorate the water quality of lakes
and streams far from the source of the
pollutant.
Over 80 percent of Washington's sulfur
dioxide pollution comes from industrial and
power plants, so monitoring efforts are
concentrated in urbanized areas, as Figure 3
demonstrates. About half the emissions in the
state are from ASARCO's Tacoma smelting
and refining operations. However, violations
of standards have not occurred in Tacoma
since December 1976. ASARCO has
reduced their total emissions and uses a tall
stack to disperse emissions, reducing
operations when weather conditions (such
as thermal inversions) prevent adequate
mixing to occur.
Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless
gas—high concentrations cause uncon-
sciousness and death. At concentrations
above the primary standard, this pollutant can
interfere with mental alertness and physical
activity, especially for persons with heart or
lung disorders.
Carbon monoxide is a by-product of fossil
fuels combustion. Its major source is motor
vehicles, and the most severe violations of
standards are recorded where automobiles
are concentrated—in urban areas. Figure 4
illustrates the extent of the carbon monoxide
problem in Washington, and Figure 5
compares the five areas not meeting the
carbon monoxide standard.
Motor vehicles are responsible for about
90 percent of carbon monoxide emissions in
non-attainment counties; therefore, plans for
reducing such emissions center on improve-
ments to individual automobiles and to the
transportation system as a whole. As older
cars are replaced by models with up-to-date
pollution control equipment, carbon
monoxide should decline. However, Seattle
would still fall short of the standard by
1982, and the outlook is the same for
Tacoma. The Washington State legislature
recently authorized inspection and
maintenance programs for those areas
where standards will not be met by 1982
to ensure that vehicle emission control
devices are functioning effectively. Seattle,
for instance, plans a vehicle inspection
program. Other measures for control
include reducing the amount of traffic on
heavily traveled roads, especially idling
vehicles at peak hours. Spokane and
Yakima have improved traffic flow, and
plan or have implemented improvements to
their public transit systems. Peak hour
traffic volumes can be reduced by greater
use of staggered work hours, mass transit,
carpooling, and exclusive bike, car and
bus lanes.
Figure 3.
Air Quality Status — Sulfur Dioxide
STANDARDS ATTAINED
PRIMARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
ALERT LEVELS EXCEEDED
NO MONITORING OR INSUFFICIENT DATA
Figure 4.
Air Quality Status — Carbon Monoxide
Figure 5.
Percent of Observed Days Carbon Monoxide
Exceeded Standards
AREAS
MONITORED
Seattle c/i
Tacoma c/i
c/i
OBSERVED DAYS EXCEEDED (%)
10	20	30
Spokane
R
Yakima C/i
Vancouver c/i
I

II
(95/364)
(1/321)
(77/328)
(1/360)
(3/315)
(15/84)
]




II
J
]




C/I: COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
R: RESIDENTIAL
NOTE: Number in parentheses represents total number of
days exceeding standards per number of observation days.

COWLITZ
CUUAM
LINCOLN
xrrmAfl
••IWtfUU
COWl.IT/
3

-------
Ozone
Unlike the other air pollutants discussed in
this report, photochemical oxidants are not
given off by industries or automobiles.
Rather, they are the product of a chemical
reaction that occurs in the atmosphere when
two other pollutants are present. These are
oxides of nitrogen (which are discussed
below) and hydrocarbons. The chief
source of hydrocarbons is automobile
exhaust. Volatile organic compounds
(VOC), such as solvents and gasoline,
also add to hydrocarbon emissions. Besides
oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons,
sunlight is necessary for the reaction. When
all three are present, a class of chemicals
known as photochemical oxidants is
produced, the most common of which is the
gas, ozone. Air quality standards refer to
ozone and only ozone is measured by
monitoring instrumentation.
Ozone irritates the eyes and respiratory
system, aggravates asthma and chronic lung
disease, and reduces lung and heart capacity.
It also probably causes more damage to
plants in the U.S.A. than any other pollutant.
Because significant quantities of the
substances that give rise to ozone come
from automobiles, measures taken to
reduce other automobile emissions, such
as carbon monoxide, are also effective in
controlling ozone. Regional transportation
plans and enforcement of VOC regulations
should help alleviate the ozone problem.
The VOC regulations require improved
practices in such areas as gasoline
marketing, petroleum refining, surface
coating, degreasing, and highway paving.
As Figures 6 and 7 show, ozone concentra-
tions reached the alert level in Vancouver
in 1978, and both Seattle and Tacoma
exceeded primary standards. In order to
attain standards, Seattle and Tacoma plan
transit improvements including additional
buses, park-and-ride lots, exclusive bus and
carpool lanes, parking controls, traffic flow
improvements, and bicycle lanes. Inspection
and maintenance of vehicles will be required
for the greater Seattle area, and probably for
Vancouver.
Figure 6.
Air Quality Status — Ozone
Figure 7. Percent of Observed Days Ozone
Exceeded Standards
AREAS
MONITORED
Seattle
Tacoma
Vancouver
OBSERVED DAYS EXCEEDED (%)
1	2 3 4 S

I
(3/270)
(4/323)
(3/203)
(2/182)



I



I


I
I
R RESIDENTIAL
r RURAL
~ STANDARDS ATTAINED
PRIMARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
J ALERT LEVELS EXCEEDED
Q NO MONITORING OR INSUFFICIENT DATA
NOTE: Number in parentheses represents total number of
days exceeding standards per number of observation days.
Nitrogen Dioxide
Oxides of nitrogen are gases formed
mainly by combustion. Sources include
automobiles and power plants. Besides
irritating the eyes and respiratory tract
and damaging metal, rubber, fabric and
dyes, oxides of nitrogen contribute to
photo-chemical oxidants, as described
above.
During 1978, Washington complied with
the nitrogen dioxide standard. In the
state, as elsewhere in the nation, emission
level of nitrogen dioxide from vehicles
seems to be stable (even though the
number of vehicle miles driven has
increased in recent years) because each
year proportionately more vehicles are
equipped with better emission control
devices.
Lead
In 1978 EPA established an air quality
standard for lead. The standard is required
to be achieved by October of 1982. At this
time the states in cooperation with EPA
are gathering data to identify areas where
the standard is being exceeded.
Other Hazardous Materials
In addition to the five major air pollutants
discussed above, there are 14 known point
sources of asbestos, beryllium, and mercury
in Washington. Environmental concentra-
tions of each of these toxic substances
comply with national and state standards.
EPA is analyzing other potentially hazardous
pollutants, and standards for these will be
developed.
J»'ER30N
4

-------
Figure 8.
Air Quality Trends in Eight Washington Areas
(Based on 1977-78 data)
STANDARDS
SHORT TERM
AREAS
MONITORED
Seattle r
Tacoma r
Port Angeles R
Longview R
c/i
TSP S02 CO o3 no2 tsp so2
I	
Yakima r
Vancouver r
Clarkston r
Spokane R
c/l COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL
R RESIDENTIAL
r RURAL
Trends in Washington Air Quality
Trends in air quality indicate whether past
pollution control activities have been effective.
Figure 8 shows the urban areas in
Washington in which air quality standards
were exceeded in 1978. It also illustrates a
two-year comparison of 1977 and 1978 data.
Most of Washington's air quality has
remained relatively unchanged from 1977,
except for an increase in particulate
concentrations near the Vancouver area
In Figure 9 the areas that exceeded standards
during 1978 have been color coded to reflect
the worst violation of any pollutant standard
experienced in at least one monitoring site
within a county. The figure indicates that,
except for Eastern Washington's problems
with fugitive dust, the most severe violations
of air quality standards are mainly in the
heavily populated areas of the state.
Figure 9.
Washington Areas Exceeding One or More
Air Quality Standards During 1978
| 4 | IMPROVING TREND
| ^ | DETERIORATING TREND
NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
I NO MONITORING OR INSUFFICIENT DATA
I STANDARDS ATTAINED
I SECONDARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
H| PRIMARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
| ALERT LEVELS EXCEEDED
I STANDARDS EXCEEDED DUE TO FUGITIVE DUST
WHATCOM
Bellingham
SKAGIT
Vnacortes
FERRY
OKANOGAN
STEVENS
ISLAND
CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH
Everett
CHELAN
ffhrson
KING
Seattle
DOUGLAS
,Wena tehee/
GRAYS
HARBOR
GRANT
KITTITAS
Ellensburg
ADAMS
Moses,
Lake
PIERCE
HURSTl
FRANKLIN
I PACIFIC
LEWIS
Yakirna«
GARF IEI i'
COWLITZ
1 Longview
SKAMANiA
BENTON WALLA WALLA
Walla Walla •
KLICKITAT
t ARK
(Vancouver
PfcND
REILLE
^AN JUAN 4
Spokane
SPOKANE
1 INC 01 N
WHITMAN

-------
The Regional Air Quality Outlook
Region 10 has relatively few heavily
populated urban centers; in the four states
there are only 6.5 million residents. While
air pollution is not confined to urban areas, it
is most severe where human activity,
especially vehicular activity, is heavily
concentrated, namely, in the 20 communities
shown in Table 2. Some violations of National
Ambient Air Quality Standards occur in every
state of Region 10, as shown in Table 2.
Idaho, Oregon, and Washington each
exceeded standards for three of the major
pollutants during 1978, while Alaska
exceeded standards only for carbon
monoxide.
Region 10's air pollution problems in 1978
were mostly due to carbon monoxide and/or
ozone concentrations. EPA is working
closely with Alaska, Idaho, Oregon and
Washington to control emissions from
vehicles and to reduce the number of
vehicle miles traveled in urban centers
having high carbon monoxide levels
through transportation controls previously
discussed.
Ozone concentrations greater than the health
standard have occurred in Western Oregon
and Washington, and future monitoring may
identify other areas. Many of the same
transportation controls used to reduce
carbon monoxide levels will be effective in
reducing ozone levels. Also, measures that
control volatile organic compounds indirectly
lower ozone levels including, for example,
floating roofs for oil storage tanks to reduce
evaporative losses.
Suspended particulate matter is a widespread
problem throughout the Northwest; it results
from both stationary industrial sources and
other sources (such as dust from roads,
particulates from home oil heating, etc.).
Particulate control devices such as
baghouses. electrostatic precipitators, and
scrubbers have been installed on many
industrial sources and some plants are
scheduled to further reduce emissions in the
future. As existing plants are modified and
Table 2.
Air Quality Status in 20 Areas of
Region 10
AREAS MONITORED	TSP S02 CO Oj
Alaska
Anchorage
Fairbanks
Idaho	Boise
Conda-Soda Springs
Kellogg
Lewiston
Pocatello
Oregon Eugene-Springfield
Grants Pass
Medford-Ashland
Portland
Salem
Washington
Clarkston
Longview
Port Angeles
Seattle
Spokane
Tacoma
Vancouver
Yakima
j] SECONDARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
J PRIMARY STANDARDS EXCEEDED
ALERT LEVELS EXCEEDED
new facilities are constructed, the best
technology available to control suspended
particulates will be required. Control of
fugitive dust is more difficult to achieve.
Paving roads and parking areas can help, as
well as improved "housekeeping" in
industrial areas (such as covering hoppers or
conveyor belts or other equipment trans-
porting raw materials). Construction sites can
be wetted down to reduce dust. However, it is
expected that reduction of fugitive dust will
be very gradual due to the cost of control.
6

-------
River Water Quality
When the U.S. Congress enacted
amendments to the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act in 1972. a national
goal was set—"fishable, swimmable"
waters by 1983. The State of Washington
also adopted that goal. The 1972
amendments subsequently stimulated new
cooperative Federal, state, and local water
quality improvement programs dedicated
to reducing pollutants in the Nation's
waters. This section discusses programs
that have been instituted in Washington,
their effectiveness, and some problems
that still remain to be resolved.
How River Water Quality is
Determined
The purpose of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act is to protect the
quality of U.S. waters for a variety of uses,
including public water supply, wildlife, fish
and shellfish, recreation, navigation,
agriculture, and industry. Each water use
depends on certain characteristics, such
as temperature, concentration of dissolved
oxygen, or absence of bacteria. These
characteristics, called parameters, can be
measured and used to evaluate water
quality. They vary with the chemistry of
the stream being mea .red, the season,
and other factors. This report is based on
the 10 related groups of water quality
parameters listed in Table 3 which have been
monitored at a network of 160 sampling
stations throughout the state.
Washington, like the other states in
Region 10, has specified certain water quality
standards. To measure water characteristics
and evaluate water quality however, a
standardized set of criteria is necessary.
These criteria are a synthesis of state
standards, national criteria, information in
the technical literature, and professional
judgment, and they represent Federal water
quality goals.
Table 3.
Criteria/Parameter Groups' for the
Water Quality Index
CRITERIA/PARAMETER GROUP AND EXPLANATION
When these criteria are applied to a stream,
they take into account the aquatic life and
recreational uses expected for that stream. In
Washington most streams are classified as
"cold water fishery" streams and are suitable
for trout and salmon. Criteria for these
streams specify lower temperatures and
higher levels of dissolved oxygen, for
example, than criteria applied to "warm
water fishery" streams, such as the Palouse
River which supports bass and perch.
Temperature
Dissolved Oxygen
PH
Aesthetics
Solids
Radioactivity
Bacteria
Trophic (Nutrient
Enrichment)
Organic Toxicity
Inorganic
Temperature of water influences the type of fish and other aquatic life
that can survive in a river. Excessively high temperatures are detrimental
to aquatic life.
To survive, fish and aquatic life must have certain levels of oxygen in the
water; therefore, low oxygen levels can be detrimental to these
organisms.
pH is the measure of acidity or alkalinity of water. Extreme levels of
either can imperil fish and aquatic life.
Refers to oil, grease, and turbidity which are visually unpleasant. This
group is mostly represented by the turbidity parameter, which is a
measure of the clarity of the water.
Dissolved minerals and suspended material such as mud or silt. Excess
dissolved minerals (hard water) interfere with agricultural, industrial, and
domestic use. Excess suspended solids adversely affect fish feeding
and spawning.
May be in water as a result of radioactive waste discharges or fallout.
Excess levels can harm aquatic and other life forms.
Bacteria indicate probable presence of disease-related organisms and
viruses not natural to water (i.e., from human sewage or animal waste)
Indicates the extent of algae or nutrients in water. Nutrients promote
algae growth. When algae (one-celled water plants) flourish they make
the water murky, and the growths make swimming and fishing
unpleasant Decomposition of dead algae can decrease dissolved
oxygen concentrations to levels harmful to fish.
Includes pesticides and other organic 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. Also includes percent saturations of
dissolved gases in water which can affect the metabolism of aquatic life.
'Approximately 80 criteria/parameters were evaluated and condensed to the 10 groups shown here.
More detailed information is available on request.
7

-------
The water quality of an individual stream
can be determined by measuring each
parameter group and comparing it to the
criteria. But to compare one stream to
another, a single, inclusive number tor
each stream is useful; consequently, a
Water Quality Index has been formulated
The Index permits comparisons between
very different situations, such as large
rivers and small streams, or between
streams in the moist, forested coastal zone
and in the dry eastern farmlands of the
state.
Figure 10 compares the water of principal
rivers in Washington. The circle represents
the annual average Water Quality Index
for the river. The square represents the aver-
age value for the worst 3 consecutive months.
-	|*'tv
. , "¦ --CI .
- -I>~ -
WORST 3 CONSECUTIVE MONTHS ~
ANNUAL AVERAGE WATER QUALITY INDEX Q
Water Quality Index
In this report, the Water Quality Index compares water quality measured during the last 6 years
with the recommended Federal criteria. The data used to make these comparisons come from
various Federal, state, and local agencies and are stored in EPA's computer systems. The final
Index number tor each station takes into account the 10 pollution categories shown in Table 3,
adjusted to reflect the severity by which the criteria are exceeded. The Index numbers span a
scale from 0 (no measured evidence ot pollution) to 100 (severe pollution at all times). In this
report, the scale is divided into three color ranges as follows:
Blue represents streams with Index numbers between 0 and 20. These streams either have no
pollution or are minimally polluted and therefore meet the goals of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
Light Brown represents streams with Index numbers between 20 and 60. Such streams are
intermittently and/or moderately polluted and are considered marginal with respect to meeting
the goals of the Act.
Dark Brown represents streams with an Index number greater than 60. These streams are
severely polluted and do not meet the goals of the Act.
The neutral color gray is used in the graphs when the water quality status is unknown because
of inadequate data.
Figure 10.
Water Quality Index Values for
Washington's Principal Rivers
WQI VALUE
20
Palouse. Main & S F
Walla Walla/Touchet
Crab Creek
Spokane
Lower Columbia
Okanogan
Yakima
Snake
Pend Oreille
Nook sack
Upper Columbia
Elwha
Chehalis
Green/Duwamish
Willapa
Wenatchee
Nisqually
Puyallup/White
Skagit
Stillaguamish, inc. N F & S.F.
Cowlitz
Snohomish/Skykomish/Snoqualmie
Lewis
P	~
-~
-en
40
ZC
-o-
-o—~
—~
(==:
100
8

-------
Sources and Control of
Water Pollution
Pollutants that reach Washington streams
have two general origins: "point source"
pollution, such as wastewater from
industries, sewage treatment plants, and
the like, that enters streams at an easily
identified location; and less easily
identified "non-point source" pollution,
consisting of stormwater from urban areas,
irrigation water, and runoff from farm,
forest, and mining lands.
Industries that discharge waste effluent to
streams must have a permit to do so. The
permits are issued by EPA under the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) or by states that have
assumed this responsibility. By this means,
EPA can require that point source
pollutants be removed before wastewater
reaches the river. Since non-point sources
cannot be so easily treated, "best
management practices" are required
instead. For example, agricultural best
management practices might include waste
storage areas to keep organic wastes from
reaching nearby streams, or contour
plowing to prevent erosion of soil into rivers.
The responsibility for developing such
means to control non-point source
pollution has been given to local and state
agencies assigned to develop waste quality
management plans, as provided by the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
The Quality of Washington's
Principal Rivers
Of the 23 major rivers monitored in
Washington, only one stretch of the
Palouse River fails to meet Federal water
quality goals. Another nine have stretches
which only provisionally meet the goals.
Because the Cascade Mountains exercise
an influence on climate that is reflected in
water quality, streams east and west of
the mountains are discussed separately.
Water Quality West of the Cascades
Washington's major rivers west of the
Cascades, including those of the Olympic
Peninsula, Washington coastal area, and
those entering the lower Columbia River,
are generally of high quality, as Figure 11
indicates. Figure 12 illustrates the extent
that each river meets the water quality
criteria based on an annual average. The
moderate temperatures and significant
rainfall curtail the pollution problems due
to low flow and high summer
temperatures that are prevalent to the
east. Unlike Eastern Washington, the
western population and industrial centers
are more concentrated, primarily along the
shores of Puget Sound, and there are
correspondingly more point source
discharges. The effects of point source
pollution, particularly in the rivers entering
Puget Sound, are felt mainly in the lower
reaches just before their confluence with
marine waters. However, some industrial
wastes are discharged in rivers such as
the Chehalis and Lower Columbia.
Non-point source problems are due
primarily to forest harvest and related
management activities, agricultural
activities, and urban stormwater runoff
including erosion related to land clearing
and construction. The impact of non-point
sources on these streams, especially small
feeder streams, is of increasing
significance as the population of this area
continues to grow.
Figure 11.
Water Quality Status of Principal Rivers
| UNACCEPTABLE - SEVERE POLLUTION
J MARGINAL — INTERMITTENT. OR MODERATE POLLUTION
| ACCEPTABLE — MINIMAL. OR NO POLLUTION
| UNKNOWN. DUE TO INSUFFICIENT DATA
9
.tillaguamish R
Skykomish R
.Snohomish R
jSnoqualmie R
AflNa ToijQhef
BASED UPON THE AVERAGE ANNUAL WQI

-------
Water Quality East of the Cascades
Eastern Washington is much drier than
the western part of the State and has
more extreme variations in temperature.
Water quality within this region varies
from poor to excellent. It is generally
good in areas of fairly high elevation: i.e.,
the eastern slopes of the Cascades, the
Okanogan highlands, the Colville region,
and-the Blue Mountains (Figure 11). Water
quality problems increase in the Yakima,
Crab Creek, Walla Walla/Touchet, and
Figure 12.
River Miles Meeting Water Quality Criteria
In Washington
Palouse drainages, where the effects of
climatically induced low stream flows and
high summer temperatures are aggravated
by man's activities. Problems typically
encountered include high levels of
bacteria, turbidity, suspended solids,
nutrients, and elevated summer water
temperatures. Most of this degradation is
attributed to agriculture-related non-point
sources such as irrigation runoff and
erosion from cultivated dryland areas.
RIVER
Palouse. Main & S.F.
Walla Walla Touchet
Crab Creek
Spokane
Lower Columbia
Okanogan
Yakima
Snake
Pend Oreille
Nooksack
Upper Columbia
Elwha
Chehalis
Green/Duwamish
Willapa
Wenatchee
Nisqually
Puyallup/White
Skagit
Stillaguamish incl NF &SF
Cowlitz
Snohomish Skykomish'Snoqualmie
Lewis
RIVER MILES
100	200

P
BASED UPON THE AVERAGE ANNUAL WQI
| UNACCEPTABLE - SEVERE POLLUTION
jP] MARGINAL — INTERMITTENT, OR MODERATE POLLUTION
^ ACCEPTABLE — MINIMAL OR NO POLLUTION
n STATUS UNKNOWN
Causes of River Water Quality
Problems
Figure 13 shows the status of 35 Washington
river stretches with respect to each of the 10
pollution categories shown in the Water
Quality Index. Most of the rivers in which
temperature criteria were exceeded lie east of
the Cascades: the most severe instance was
in the lower Walla Walla drainage. Any human
activities that decrease river flow or expose
the water to sunlight will raise the water
temperature. Irrigation diversions and return
flows, impoundments, and the destruction of
vegetation on stream banks are a few
examples.
Only four river stretches experienced
500 elevated summer pH values: Crab Creek,
and the Okanogan, Pend Oreille, and Yakima
Rivers. pH problems are generally related to
nutrient availability in that excessive nutrients
promote algae and weed growths, which
influence the pH of the water through their
daily respiratory cycles.
Peak bacteria levels exceeded the recom-
mended criteria in portions of about half the
streams evaluated. Violations occur on both
sides of the Cascades, but the Walla Walla,
Palouse, and Yakima drainages experience
the most significant problems. Livestock
wastes that wash into streams from pastures,
grazing lands, and feedlots, and discharge
from sewage treatment plants account for
most of the bacterial contamination in
Washington streams. Excessive nutrients,
mainly phosphorous and nitrogen, which
arise from the same sources as bacteria
(agricultural run-off and sewage) followed
a state-wide pattern similar to that described
for bacteria.
The aesthetic quality of a river is largely
related to whether the water is clear or
muddy. Excessive turbidity generally means
that there are high levels of suspended
solids present, indicative of eroded soil
carried into rivers. Most of Washington's
significant erosion problems, as indicated by
these two measurements, are in the agri-
cultural areas of the Crab Creek, Palouse,
10

-------
Figure 13.
Trends in River Water Quality Categories,
Washington
Palouse
near mouth
Palouse
at Pullman
Walla Walla
near mouth
Touchet
near mouth
Crab Creek
near mouth
Okanogan
at Oroville
Okanogan
near mouth
Yakima near
Union Gap
Snake at
mouth
4/
" i
/ /
f *¦
'/
Crab Creek above
Moses Lake
Spokane at
Wash /Idaho Border
Spokane at Riverside
State Park
Spokane below
Long Lake Dam
Lower Columbia
above Portland
Lower Columbia
below Portland
Yakima below
Granger
Pend Oreille at
Idaho/Wash, border
Pend Oreille at
Canadian border
RIVER
Nooksack above
Lynden
Nooksack
below Lynden
Upper Columbia at
Canadian border
Elwha near
mouth
Chehalis
near Porter
Green above
Auburn
Duwamish below
Renton treatment plant
Willapa near
Wiilapa
Wenatchee at
mouth
Nisqually
at mouth
Puyallup
near mouth
Skagit above
Sedro Woo I ley
Skagit below
Sedro Woo I ley
Stillaguamish
near mouth
Cowlitz
near mouth
Snohomish at
Snohomish
Lewis below
Merwin Dam
I MEETS STANDARD QUALITY GOALS
~ MARGINALLY MEETS GOALS
| UNACCEPTABLE - SEVERE POLLUTION
I NO MONITORING OR INSUFFICIENT DATA
IMPROVING TREND
E DETERIORATING TREND
NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
| ~ | TREND NOT APPARENT WITH AVAILABLE DATA
»
/
 
-------
and Walla Walla drainages, especially during
periods of rainfall and snow-melt. Other
factors besides agriculture, such as forestry
and construction practices and glacial melt-
waters, also influence the aesthetics and
solids parameters.
Organic toxicants include pesticides and
chemical substances poisonous to humans
and other life. It was only recently that
intensive monitoring began to detect minute
concentrations of organic toxicants.
Monitoring recently begun in the lower
Spokane, Elwha, and Yakima Rivers for
certain pesticides and herbicides, indicates
that no significant levels of these compounds
have been detected. More widespread
sampling for a much larger number of
organic toxicants is needed to better assess
the extent of these compounds in
Washington's streams.
Inorganic toxicants include the heavy metals
zinc, lead, and nickel, which can harm fish
and persons who eat contaminated fish. A
number of eastern Washington rivers, as well
as several west of the Cascades, appear not
to meet recently refined Federal criteria for
inorganic toxicants. However, it is unclear at
this time whether there is a genuine problem
with inorganic toxicants or whether it is
simply a problem with insufficiently sensitive
analytical and monitoring techniques.
EPA monitoring data on radiation in the
Columbia River at Northport, Richland, and
Westport are insufficient to calculate the
Water Quality Index for this parameter.
However, radiation levels are less than 3
percent of the drinking water standard, well
below any level of concern.
Figure 14.
Water Quality Trends in Washington
WATER
YEAR
PERCENT OF STATIONS
20	40	60



I























,





I


I
River Water Quality Trends
Figure 14 compares annual water quality
conditions in Washington over the past 6
years, based on data collected at 38 repre-
sentative monitoring stations. The trend has
been relatively stable, though water quality
may be deteriorating at those southern and
eastern stations located in watersheds with
intense agricultural use. Incomplete data
from some of the monitoring stations prior
to 1978 make any real trend difficult to
confirm, and minor fluctuations in the
percentages of stations meeting the goals
may probably be attributed to variations in
climatic conditions and sampling times.
The greater percentage of stations only
provisionally meeting the Federal goals as
shown on this year's graph, compared to the
1978 issue of this report, is mainly due to a
change in analytical methods. Previous
reports analyzed trends on the basis of data
averaged over 12 months. The percentages
shown in Figure 14 are based on data
averaged over the worst 3 consecutive
months at each station. This evaluation
scheme is more sensitive to changes in water
quality than using the average annual status.
Data based upon the worst 3-consecutive months status
ot 38 monitoring stations within, and bordering upon,
Washington (Organic and inorganic toxicant categories
not included.)
| UNACCEPTABLE - SEVERE POLLUTION
~ MARGINAL - INTERMITTENT OR MODERATE
POLLUTION
ACCEPTABLE MINIMAL OR NO POLLUTION
12
-------
The Outlook for Washington
The NPDES permit system and implementa-
tion of areawide wastewater management
plans being developed will correct many of
the pollution problems discussed above. New
and improved sewage treatment plants,
improved operation of existing plants, and
best management practices in agriculture and
livestock operations will most noticeably
improve water temperature, dissolved
oxygen, bacteria, and nutrient and solids
levels by the target year 1983. The effect of
forest practices on erosion and temperature
levels is being controlled through the Forest
Practices Act, which requires road construc-
tion and logging activities to be done in a
manner to minimize erosion and restricts
logging adjacent to streams to protect
stream cover.
There is good potential for improved water
quality, particularly in significantly degraded
streams east of the Cascades, in light of those
best management practices described above.
Dissolved gas supersaturation, which
results when water passes over dam spill-
ways, is harmful to fish. Although it did not
occur in 1978 due to low flows, it is a
persistent problem which can be controlled
to some degree by spillway modification.
Point source controls are expected to
produce some improvement in certain stream
segments affected by sewage treatment
and industrial wastes.
New analyses of organic toxicants may reveal
them as a problem in some areas of
Washington. If significant levels are found,
they are likely to be in metropolitan areas
where the impact of both municipal and
industrial waste discharges would be the
greatest. Elevated levels may also be found
in streams that drain agricultural areas with
high pesticide usage.
The Regional Outlook
The Water Quality Index is used in Figure 15
to compare 26 major Pacific Northwest River
Basins within Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and
Washington. Figure 16 depicts the relative
extent of water quality degradation within
each river basin, and Figure 17 shows
similar information on a regional map.
Figure 15.
Water Quality Index Values for Region 10
River Basins
WQI VALUE
20	40	60	80	100
Tanana
Susitna
S.E. Alaska
Lower Yukon
Spokane
Kuskokwim
Bear
Middle Snake
Klamath
Lower Columbia
Kootenai
Lower Snake
Yakima
Upper Snake
Upper Columbia
Arctic Slope
Oregon Coast
Clark Fork/Pend Oreille
Willamette
Washington Coast
Puget Sound
Upper Yukon
N.W. Alaska
Copper
Bristol Bay
Kenai-Knik
~ WORST 3 CONSECUTIVE MONTHS
O annual average water quality index
A NO MONITORING
-
-------
Figure 16 reveals that several Alaska river
drainages have the highest Water Quality
Index values in Region 10. These are caused
by high levels of turbidity and suspended
solids during spring and summer, which are
primarily due to glacial melting and natural
streambank erosion Placer mining opera-
tions, however, may be causing unnaturally
high solids levels in some of the smaller
streams. More data are needed to assess the
impact of these activities and to provide a
general indicator of water quality in the five
Alaska basins indicated as having an
unknown status.
Only two of the Region's river basins have
Index values less than 20 and clearly meet the
Federal water quality goals. The majority of
those that provisionally meet the goals
drain arid or agricultural portions of the
Region where non-point source pollution is
difficult to control. Those criteria that were
exceeded are in the categories of
temperature, bacteria, trophic, aesthetic,
and solids parameters. In Washington's
Spokane Basin, high heavy metals
concentrations from mining activities on the
South Fork Coeur d'Alene River in Idaho are
primarily responsible for the elevated
Index values. Heavy metals of unknown
origin are responsible for high Index values
in the Lower Snake, Lower Columbia, and
Kootenai Basins
Figure 16.
Miles Within Principal Region 10 River Basins
Meeting Water Quality Criteria
RIVER MILES
400
Tanana
Susitna
S.E. Alaska
Lower Yukon
Spokane
Kuskokwim
Bear
Middle Snake
Klamath
Lower Columbia
Kootenai
Lower Snake
Yakima
Upper Snake
Upper Columbia
Arctic Slope
Oregon Coast
Clark Fork/Pend Oreille
Willamette
Washington Coast
Puget Sound
Upper Yukon
N W Alaska
Copper
Bristol Bay
Kenai-Knik
BASED UPON THE AVERAGE ANNUAL WOI
UNACCEPTABLE SEVERE POLLUTION
MARGINAL INTERMITTENT OR MODERATE POLLUTION
ACCEPTABLE - MINIMAL OR NO POLLUTION
STATUS UNKNOWN
14
-------
Figure 17.
Water Quality Status of Principal Region 10
River Basins
BASED UPON THE AVERAGE ANNUAL
WOI
UNACCEPTABLE SEVERE POLLUTION
MARGINAL INTERMITTENT OR
MODERATE POLLUTION
ACCEPTABLE MINIMAL OR NO
POL I UT ION
STATUS UNKNOWN
NOTE State ot Alaska is represented at
approximately 30% of true scale
lkaqir
UV'P*
V I'
Regional water quality trends have been
analyzed by comparing data from 84 repre-
sentative monitoring stations over a 6-year
period (Figure 18). Due to inadequate data,
Alaska rivers could not be included in the
analysis; nor were organic or inorganic
toxicants included, since there have been
significant changes in analytical techniques
and reporting procedures over the time
period considered. There has been little
significant change at the stations since
1973. Although point source controls have
made many improvements in Regional water
quality, further plans to identify and control
non-point sources are needed in order to
improve water quality at those stations still
not fully meeting water quality goals. ,
Figure 18.
Water Quality Trends in Region 10
PERCENT OF STATIONS
20	40
WATER
YT AR
Based upon the water quality status during the worst
3 consecutive months per station at 84 monitoring
stations within Region 10. (Alaska stations. Itox and Otox
pollution categories not included.)
15
-------
Lake Water Quality
Inland lakes and waterways constitute one
of Washington's most important recreational
and commercial resources. Moreover, the
quality of these waters affects the beauty
and aesthetic character of the state. It is
generally felt that the lake water quality in
Washington and the Pacific Northwest is
among the best in the Nation. Only a few of
the major recreational lakes in the state have
significant water quality problems which
impair their recreational use.
How Lake Water Quality is
Determined
A numerical water quality index has not been
developed for lakes as it has been for rivers.
Instead, the water quality of Washington
lakes is evaluated on the basis of thei r ecolog-
ical conditions and how they affect persons
wishing to use the lakes for recreation
If a lake is undisturbed by human
activities, it undergoes a natural process of
aging, known to ecologists as
eutrophication. Once a lake is created, by
whatever means, it begins to fill in. While
it is filling in, the water chemistry and
types of organisms that can survive in the
lake also change. At first the water is
clear (pristine) and has few nutrients
(mostly minerals) and low populations of
aquatic life. As the lake continues to age
and becomes "eutrophic," sediments and
nutrients from the surrounding watershed
accumulate, stimulating frequent algae
blooms. Floating mats of aquatic plants
cover much of the surface and the water
may appear bright green. The process by
which dead algae are decomposed by
bacteria can consume nearly all the
dissolved oxygen in the water, which in
turn kills fish. Fish populations in
eutrophic lakes are typically stunted.
Finally, the lake fills with soil and dead
plants and becomes land.
The whole process happens naturally; it often
takes thousands of years. But man can
significantly accelerate the process by adding
nutrients and other substances to lake
water—a process referred to as "cultural
eutrophication." Land use practices on farm
land, forests, and construction sites often
result in erosion of soils into streams and,
subsequently, lakes. Nutrients, mainly
nitrogen and phosphorus, are chief
constituents of discharge from sewage
treatment plants, urban runoff, pastures
and feedlots, and certain industrial processes.
How Trophic Conditions Affect
Recreational Uses
Water quality agencies are concerned with
the trophic status of Washington lakes
because many uses of lakes are closely
related to their ecological condition. For
example, growths of algae or other water
plants 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.
To analyze the extent to which recreational
uses are impaired in any given lake, and
to compare one lake to another, the
measurement scheme shown in Table 4
has been used. This scheme results in a
numerical score for each lake ranging from
a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 12. A score
of 4 indicates that there is little, if any,
impairment of swimming, fishing, boating, or
aesthetics (visual enjoyment). A score of 12
indicates that all uses are severely impaired.
Figure 19 shows the lakes analyzed in this
report. Table 5 indicates the degree and
major cause of use impairment for recre-
ational lakes in Washington. Vancouver
Lake, Moses Lake, and Silver Lake are
considered significantly impaired in two
or more respects. Another 17 lakes are
moderately impaired, mostly due to aesthetic
conditions. Most of the lakes with water
quality problems receive stormwater runoff
and septic tank seepage from lakeside
residential areas. Runoff due to forest
practices also causes problems in some
lakes. The large lakes and reservoirs of
eastern Washington receive irrigation
return flows and runoff from agricultural
lands that contain fertilizers and animal
wastes. This accelerates eutrophication
processes.
Recreational use of lakes in itself can affect
water quality. Power boats create waves that
erode banks, contributing to sediment,
nutrients, and muddy water. Removing
vegetation along shorelines to enhance
public access can also lead to erosion.
How Recreational Use is Being
Restored
Some measures being implemented to
improve lake water quality include dredging
to remove nutrient-containing sediments and
decomposing plant material that consumes
oxygen, flushing, erosion control, aeration,
physically removing aquatic plants, and both
chemical and biological controls to prevent
eutrophication.
For example, Medical Lake was treated with
alum to precipitate phosphorous and algae
to the lake bottom, where it forms a layer
over the bottom sediments that prevents
nutrients from being released into the water.
The alum treatment resulted in a 90%
reduction in phosphorous and eliminated the
blue-green algae. Spada-Chaplain Lake had
high levels of turbidity which were reduced
by rerouting stream channels and stream
beds to reduce erosion of clay into the lake.
Revegetating the banks of the lake also
assisted in reducing turbidity. Plans to
improve water quality in Vancouver Lake
and Lake Sacajawea include dredging,
dilution, and control of polluting urban and
agricultural runoff.
16
-------
[pzette Lake
Lake
Cushman
LongQ
f Lake
Lake
Quinault
Capitol LakeC
Deep Lake^
Hicks Lake
Swimming Very low bacteria levels (Fecal ¦
coliforms geometric mean less
than 50 per 100 ml)
Fishing	No adverse conditions. Healthy [ 1 j
fish population.
Boating Less than 10% of surface area
affected by aquatic weeds
Aesthetics Objects visible in water to depth m
of 10 feet or more and low
phosphorus (Secchi Disc" at
10 feet; total phosphorus of less
than 10 ug/l**)
Moderate bacteria levels (Fecal
coliforms 50 to 200 per 100 ml)
Slightly adverse conditions.
Slight reduction in fish population.
10% to 30% affected
tn
Objects visible from 1.5 to 10 feet 0
and moderate phosphorus level
(Secchi Disc at 1.5 to 10 feet; total
phosphorus 10 to 20 ug/l)
Unhealthy bacteria levels (Fecal
coliforms 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)
Table 4.
Criteria for Evaluating Impairment
of Lakes
¦ LITTLE OR NO IMPAIRMENT
~ MODERATE IMPAIRMENT
I SIGNIFICANT IMPAIRMENT
[H
¦
¦
RECREATIONAL		MODERATE	SIGN'FICANT	
USE	CRITERIA	SCORE CRITERIA	SCORE	CRITERIA	SCORE
The Clean Lakes program provides Federal
grants to local agencies to improve lake water
quality.
Figure 19.
Water Quality of Washington's Principal
Recreational Lakes
DEGREE OF IMPAIRMENT
Baker Lake
l> •
pLake Whatcom
Big Lake
T
Ross Lake
® Osoyoos Lake
¦Lake Ballinger
Green Lake
Lake Washington
Lake Sammamish
Pine Lake	... . ,
Lake Wenatchee
Lake Meridian
Fenwick Lake
iKachess Lake
^Lake Chelan
ton
nish
W I oU \A	
1/ Banks Lake
(5 Park Lake
^Lake Tapps
-Wapato Lake
^Long Lake
1 Patterson Lake
\X
Cle Elum Lake
^ Moses Lake
Potholes Reservoir
^Silver Lake
) Lake Sacajawea
^"Lake Merwin
^Vancouver Lake
Lake Roosevelt
Liberty LakeQ
O
Medical Lake
k Lake Wallula
Successful restoration requires both
measures such as those named above
and, equally important, a continuing
program to maintain water quality. For
instance, Silver Lake has significant turbidity
problems arising from forestry practices in
the area, but unless there is a program for
maintaining water quality, a Clean Lakes
grant cannot be approved.
SCORE	(No uses impaired) 4 (All uses moderately impaired) 5-8 (All uses significantly impaired) 9-12
"A Secchi Disc is a round black and white plate suspended on a chain and used to determine water clarity.
"ug/l = micrograms per liter, a measurement used for low concentrations of dissolved substances.
17
-------
Table 5.
The Recreational Impairment and Trophic
Status of the Principal Recreational Lakes
in Washington
SURFACE
AREA
NAME (ACRES)
Vancouver Lake	2,600
Moses Lake	7,000
Silver Lake	3,000
Long Lake/Kitsap	340
Long Lake/Thurston	330
Patterson Lake	270
Lake Ballinger	100
Pine lake	86
Lake Sacajawga	61
Capitol Lake	270
Fenwick Lake	24
Wapato Lake	28
Liberty Lake	700
Green Lake	260
Potholes Reservoir	20,000
Park Lake	350
Lake Sammamish	5,000
Banks Lake	25,000
Medical Lake	160
Lake Meridian	150
Big Lake	520
Hicks Lake	160
Deep Lake	65
Lake Quinault	3,700
Lake Cushman	4,000
Crescent Lake	5,100
Lake Whatcom	5,000
Lake Ozette	7,800
Lake Merwin	4,000
Lake Tapps	2,300
Lake Washington	22,000
Ross Lake	11,500
Lake Chelan	33,500
Lake Wenatchee	2,500
Kachess Lake	4,500
Cle El urn Lake	4,800
Baker Lake	3,600
Osoyoos Lake	2,000
Lake Roosevelt	79,000
Lake Wallula	19,000
/ / /
Co C 4)

£
/>

I






	



¦1










































































	
































































	
	















	



'

	

	
	


n








	

¦¦

mmm



	









	

—
—


	




















CAUSE OF PROBLEM
Stream-fed nutrients
Agricultural runoff /erosion
Forest practices
Stormwater
Stormwater/Septic tanks
Stormwater/Septic tanks
Stormwater
Stormwater/Septic tanks
Stormwater
Stormwater/Stream-fed nutrients
Stormwater
Stormwater
Strmwtr/Septic tanks/Solid waste
Stormwater
Agricultural runoff
Stormwater
Agricultural runoff
Nutrients in sediments
Stormwater
A Regional Overview
Lakes are one of the most important
resources of the Pacific Northwest and
Alaska. In Region 10, there are 140 lakes and
reservoirs that are 10 square miles or more
in surface area, and thousands of smaller
lakes.
For the most part, the 145 most heavily used
lakes within Region 10 are of high quality,
with few impairments related to human
activities. Figure 20 compares the percentage
of lakes impaired for recreational use in each
state. More than half the lakes in Washington,
Oregon, and Idaho have little or no
impairment. All of the lakes in Alaska for
which data are available are unimpaired.
However, some major lakes within the Region
are approaching a level of eutrophication
that interferes with their selected uses. Some
is from the natural aging of the lakes. The
challenge for the future is to prevent further
cultural eutrophication and where possible to
correct present problems. The Clean Lakes
program is providing for the rehabilitation of
damaged lakes along with a management
plan to assure that the rehabilitated lakes
remain clean. Through programs such as
this, many of the high-use recreational lakes
in the Region are being restored and
preserved for future generations.
Figure 20.
Impairment Status of Recreational Lakes
in Region 10
PERCENT OF LAKES IMPAIRED
	20 40 60 80 100
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Based upon evaluation of 145 Region 10 lakes
NON-EUTROPHIC	LITTLE OR NO IMPAIRMENT
MODERATELY EUTROPHIC |~j MODERATE IMPAIRMENT
EUTROPHIC	SIGNIFICANT IMPAIRMENT
¦ NO MONITORING OR INSUFFICIENT DATA
18
-------
Marine Water Quality
The coastal and estuarine waters of the
State of Washington contribute greatly to
the commercial and recreational assets of the
Northwest. While the majority of these waters
are relatively clean, pollution problems do
exist in some areas, particularly in waters
near population and industrial centers on
certain Puget Sound bays and inlets, and in
the Grays Harbor area.
How Marine Water Quality is
Determined
Since direct measurement of marine water
is a complex and expensive undertaking,
the quality of marine water can be inferred
from the condition of shellfish. Shellfish
concentrate disease-causing bacteria,
viruses, toxic chemicals, and other
contaminants from the water in which they
live. Consequently, shellfish indicate the
degree of pollution in marine waters and
provide an indirect way of assessing the
success of pollution control efforts.
In this report, marine water quality
determinations are based upon criteria
established by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration for the National Shellfish
Sanitation Program. Waters that are free
from fecal contamination (bacteria from
sewage), industrial wastes, radioactive
elements, and biotoxins (certain naturally
produced poisons) are classified as
"approved for commercial shellfish
harvesting." "Conditionally approved"
waters may be closed when seasonal
increases in population, freshwater runoff
containing contaminants at certain times of
the year, or temporary malfunctioning of
wastewater treatment plants result in
failure to meet the criteria. Waters found
to be contaminated or suspected of being
contaminated, which would produce
shellfish unsafe for human consumption,
are classified as "closed."
Washington's Marine Waters
Of the 228,900 acres of classified
commercial shellfish growing waters in
Washington, about 68% are currently
approved for commercial harvesting and
11% are conditionally approved, depending
on specific conditions that are monitored
throughout the year. The remaining 21%
are closed and cannot be used to produce
shellfish for human consumption. Figure
21 shows the location of classified waters
in Washington.
The approved areas include most of Willapa
Bay, Northern and Southern Puget Sound,
the Strait of Juan de Fuca, and all of Hood
Canal and the Pacific Ocean beaches.
Central Puget Sound is mostly closed, due to
potential pollution arising from the urban-
industrial areas of Seattle, Tacoma, and
Bremerton. Municipal sewage treatment
plant discharges and septic tank problems,
also contribute to closures. In Burley
Lagoon, for instance, 135 acres of oyster-
growing area were closed when the
lagoon was polluted with fecal material
from domestic septic tanks and nearby
pastures. Industrial waste discharges along
the Tacoma waterfront have occasionally
degraded water quality and caused fish
kills.
On occasion, harvesting has had to be
restricted in Northern Puget Sound
because of increased levels of paralytic
shellfish poison (PSP) in shellfish. This
poison is a naturally occurring substance
Gonyaulax catenella (known commonly
as "red tide"). Some improvements have been
noted in Everett and Bellingham due to
reduced effluents from the pulp mills in the
area Additional improvements are still
needed, however.
Figure 21.
Water Quality Map of Washington's
Classified Commercial Shellfish
Growing Areas
n APPROVED FOR COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH
HARVESTING
¦ CONDITIONALLY APPROVED FOR COMMERCIAL
SHELLFISH HARVESTING
I CLOSED TO COMMERCIAL SHELLFISH HARVESTING
(Hoquiam
,Bay City
Raymond
South Bend
llwaco
Columbia R
.Port Townsandi
Port Angeles
Bremerton
Port Orchard
19
-------
area. Additonal improvements are still
needed, however.
Less than half of the available shellfish
growing area of Grays Harbor is approved
for use. Major point source contributors are
pulp mills and inadequate sewage treatment
although improved waste treatment programs
have reduced the contribution of these
sources. Agricultural activities, coupled with
seasonal fluctuations in freshwater runoff
also contribute to water quality problems.
In Willapa Bay discharges from municipal
sewage treatment plants in the vicinity of
South Bend and Raymond are primarily
responsible for the closure of a small part
of the Bay to oyster harvesting. The extent of
closures in the various commercial shellfish
areas is compared in Figure 22.
Because of wastewater treatment
programs, marine water quality in
Washington has improved in recent years.
For example, improved water treatment
programs at Grays Harbor pulp mills have
reduced the contribution of these sources
and should reduce them further in the
future. However, further reductions in
contamination from sewage treatment
plants and industrial discharges will be
required to restore those waters
conditionally approved or closed to
shellfish harvest. At the same time, care
must be taken to maintain high quality
areas. Pierce County Commissioners have
passed a resolution establishing Burley
Lagoon and three other shellfish growing
areas in Pierce County as "environmentally
sensitive" areas. Population growth along
Hood Canal, for instance, could create a
problem in the future.
A Regional Overview
A total of 349,000 acres has been
classified as commercial shellfish growing
area in Region 10. This represents
approximately 2% of the classified growing
waters in the Nation. Of the regional
growing area 72% is classified as
approved, 9% conditionally approved, and
19% closed (Figure 23). Regionally,
Washington contains the largest
percentage of the total classified area (65%
or 228,900 acres), followed by Alaska (27%
or 92,400 acres), and Oregon (8% or
28,100 acres), as shown in Figure 23.
Fecal contamination, or the great potential
for such contamination due to proximity to
municipal sewage treatment facilities,
accounts for most of the closed area. The
conditionally approved areas are
characterized by excessive coliform
contamination from seasonal increases in
freshwater runoff from agricultural and
forestry activities as well as the occasional
malfunctioning or bypassing of sewage
treatment plants. Although the presence in
shellfish of a naturally occurring biotoxin,
paralytic shellfish poison (PSP), has
Rgure 22.
Status of Classified Shellfish Areas
in Washington
resulted in the closure of growing areas,
commercial shellfish harvesting has not
been restricted because of chemical or
radioactive contamination.
Sewage wastes associated with population
growth 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 Alaskan
clam resources, future changes in
Washington's commercial shellfish areas
would probably have the greatest impact
on the regional economy.
THOUSAND OF ACRES
20	40
Willapa Bay
Grays Harbor
Northern Puget Sound
& Strait of Juan de Fuca
Central Puget Sound
Southern Puget Sound
Hood Canal
Pacific Beaches
I
¦ 1
D
HO
m
(65 acres approved)
H
]
Figure 23.
Status of Classified Shellfish Growing Areas
in Region 10
THOUSANDS OF ACRES
50	100	150
Washington


¦
Alaska
mam




Oregon
n




~
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 state shellfish control agencies.
Regional Summary:
Percentage of the Region's
active shellfish areas that are
open for harvesting.
20
-------
Noise
When sound levels become loud enough
to be disagreeable and are instead called
noise (unwanted sounds), they also become
a threat to human health. The problem is not
limited to acute situations such as
occupational noise that can cause hearing
loss, but also includes chronic community
noise, which affects us physically and
mentally by causing nervousness, tension,
and loss of sleep. In an annual housing
survey conducted by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, noise
has consistently been the most frequently
cited undesirable condition in residential
neighborhoods, and has been one of the
leading reasons for residents wanting to
move.
The Federal Noise Control Act of 1972
gives EPA authority to set standards for
cars, trucks, interstate railroads, aircraft,
etc. However, the primary responsibility for
control of noise rests with state and local
governments, EPA has assisted Oregon
and Washington in developing noise
regulations; has helped Anchorage, Seattle,
and Portland in developing noise control
ordinances; and has assisted with
monitoring of noise levels from railroad
locomotives, ferries, and auto and
motorcycle racetracks.
The Washington Noise Control Act of 1974
gave the State Department of Ecology
(DOE) the authority to establish standards
for stationary noise sources, such as
commerce and industry, as well as for
motor vehicles. The DOE is authorized to
enforce standards related to land use,
while the State Patrol enforces standards
for motor vehicles. Lack of funds has
hampered this effort. Since DOE's budget
Table 6.
Region 10 Cities and Counties with
Local Noise Ordinances
for noise enforcement is also small, the
approach used in Washington to date has
been to encourage local government to
adopt and enforce corresponding land use
and motor vehicle regulations. Table 6 lists
the cities and counties in Washington, as
well as Oregon and Alaska, that have
passed noise ordinances, and indicates the
level of enforcement by the agencies
responsible.
CITIES/COUNTIES
WITH ORDINANCES
TYPE OF ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE CURRENTLY
ENFORCED
WASHINGTON


Columbia
E,M,N
E,M,N
Dupont
E,M
E.M
Everett
E (com & res only)
E - Safety

M
M - Police
Lynnwood
N
N - Police
Monroe
N
N - Police
N. Bonneville
E
E - Police/Planning
Olympia
M
M - Police
Othello
N
N - Police
Poulsbo
E,M,N
EMN - Police
Seattle
E,M,N
E - Health Dept


M.N - Police
Snohomish
E,M,N
E - City Manager
Winslow
E.M.N
M,N - Police
Clallam Co.
E
U
Clark Co.
N - dog control
N - Humane Society
Kitsap Co.
E
E - Sheriff
Snohomish Co.
E - res only
E - Sheriff/Health
King Co.
E.M.N
E - Health Dept

M,N - Police
OREGON


Eugene
M
M - Police
Milwaukie
N,0
N.O - Police
Dallas
N
N - Police
Monroe
M
M - Police
Portland
E,M,N,0
E - Neighborhood Env.


M.N.O
Salem
N
N - Police
West Linn
N
N - Police
Winston
M
M - Police
Multnomah Co.
O
O - Police
ALASKA


Anchorage
E,M,N
E - Health & Env. Protection
E- Environmental/land use
N- Nuisance

M- Motor Vehicle
O- Olfroad Vehicles

21
-------
Drinking Water Quality
The drinking water in most homes in the
Pacific Northwest today is generally
considered safe, mainly because of the
high standards set by public water supply
systems. Although waterborne diseases are
not common, they do occasionally occur;
one outbreak of viral gastroenteritis
affected 400 persons in Washington in
1978. In addition, chronic diseases may
result from ingesting water containing high
levels of inorganic or organic chemicals or
radioactive materials.
Public Water System Program
The Safe Drinking Water Act, passed in
1974, gave EPA primary responsibility for
establishing drinking water standards, but
intended that the states implement
programs to ensure that the standards are
met.
Washington State has over 2,600
community water systems, and over 2,000
non-community water systems that serve
non-resident populations in such facilities
as campgrounds and highway rest stops.
To implement the program with this large
number of water systems, the State
identified as its basic objective the
development and encouragement of
responsible, capable public water systems
with adequate financial resources to carry
out their responsibilities.
In order to meet this objective the state
has developed programs that provide for
certification of water system operators,
control the proliferation of inadequate
systems, and ensure proper management
and operation of small public water
systems. In addition, to assist publicly
owned water systems in making facility
improvements the State's voters approved
a $50 million bond measure in 1972.
These funds provided financial assistance
for over 350 construction projects and
almost 100 planning and engineering
projects. The funding program has resulted
in the most intensive improvement to
public water systems in the history of the
state. The 1979 legislature authorized $10
million to provide further funding over the
Figure 24.
Compliance with EPA Drinking Water
Standards
1980-81 biennium. In the 1980 general
election, the voters will decide whether $75
million in additional state general funds
should be made available for water system
improvements.
Figures 24a and b show the degree of
compliance with EPA regulations attained
in Washington in 1978. Although only 440
community systems (17%) comply with
regulations for bacterial contamination,
these systems serve 77% of the state's
population using community water
systems. Data for 65% of the systems,
serving 180,000 people, are insufficient to
judge compliance. Eighteen percent of the
community systems, serving approximately
the same percentage of people, experience
major or minor violations.
a. Community Water Systems
NUMBER OF COMMUNITY WATER SYSTEMS
300	600	900	1200	1500
2100	2400
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington












¦
IJJL


¦a
i

f; 11

.. 1		




i i
b. Persons Served by
Community Water Systems
POPULATION SERVED (IN THOUSANDS)
500	1000	1500	2000
2500
3500
4500
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
Mil









11



II






II
¦
1 1
IN COMPLIANCE WITH BACTERIOLOGICAL CONTAMINANT LEVELS
[ MINOR (1 MONTH) VIOLATION OF CONTAMINANT LEVEL
MAJOR (2 OF MORE MONTHS) VIOLATION OF CONTAMINANT LEVEL
SUFFICIENT DATA NOT AVAILABLE TO DETERMINE COMPLIANCE
22
-------
On a regional basis, only 28% of the
community water systems comply with
regulations tor bacterial contamination;
however, this includes 71% of the
population served by such systems (Figure
25). Fifteen percent of the systems
reported major or minor violations of
regulations on bacterial contamination.
Data are inadequate to assess compliance
in 57% of the systems.
Figure 25.
a. Regional Summary Based on Percentage
of Community Water Systems
b. Regional Summary Based on Population
Served by Community Water Systems
15%
71%
7%
~
IN COMPLIANCE
MINOR VIOLATIONS
MAJOR VIOLATIONS
INADEQUATE DATA
Groundwater Protection
The Safe Drinking Water Act also
established a program to protect
underground sources of drinking water
(groundwater). One feature of the national
program is referred to as the "sole source"
designation for aquifers. (Aquifers are
porous underground rock layers containing
water.) EPA has designated the Spokane
Valley-Rathdrum Prairie Aquifer 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. The
designation prohibits any Federal agency
from financially assisting any project that
EPA determines may contaminate this
important aquifer. Another program is the
ongoing nationwide assessment of the
potential for groundwater contamination
from surface water impoundments (such
as ponds and sewage lagoons).
23
-------
Solid Waste and Hazardous Substances
When a product has reached the end of
its useful life, it is normally thrown away.
Discarded items typically end up in a
landfill or are illegally dumped elsewhere—
out of sight, out of mind. Scarcity of land
for solid waste disposal, concern about
limited resources, and serious health
hazards arising from improper disposal of
toxic substances prompted Congress to
pass the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) in 1976. The
following section summarizes the waste
problems addressed through RCRA in the
Pacific Northwest, as well as hazards dealt
with by other means.
Solid Waste Disposal
The Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act provides for criteria to be established
for landfill operations. In the past,
municipal landfills have often been open
dumps. Open burning of wastes has been
virtually eliminated from Region 10, but
many environmental problems related to
improper disposal of municipal waste
remain. Water pollution is the major
concern. Rainwater draining over the
surface of a fill, or filtering into the ground
through the wastes, can dissolve (leach)
such undesirable substances as chemicals
and bacteria into streams and ground-
water. Because of the higher rainfall and
greater population west of the Cascades,
leachate problems there have been more
numerous and serious than in more arid parts
of Region 10. Recently constructed landfills
such as those in Lane County, Oregon, and
Snohomish County, Washington, have been
engineered for leachate collection and
treatment. Older landfills which had serious
leachate problems, such as the Cedar Hills
landfill in King County, Washington, are
beginning to install leachate collection
systems which pump leachate into the
sewage treatment system. Other landfills may
have to be closed altogether.
There are other disposal problems, some
of which result from improper practices.
For example, when garbage decomposes,
methane gas is produced as a by-product.
Methane is toxic to vegetation and is
explosive in certain concentrations.
Decomposition can also produce odors.
Household wastes, in particular, may
attract disease-carrying rodents and
insects. Proper disposal operation,
including daily cover and proper
compaction, will reduce many of these
problems. Sewage sludge disposal is an
increasing problem as water pollution
requirements become stricter and landfill
space becomes scarce. Alternatives such as
incineration and using the sludge on farm
or forest land are being tried. Certain
areas have special disposal problems. In
Alaska, for example, severe cold makes
disposal difficult.
Resource Recovery
RCRA provides financial assistance for
cities and public solid waste management
authorities to develop and implement
comprehensive solid waste plans, including
environmentally sound disposal methods
and resource recovery and conserva-
tion programs. Some municipal wastes,
such as glass, metal, and newspaper, can
be recycled, and much of the rest can be
converted to "refuse-derived fuel" or
burned to create steam or electricity. Lane
County, Oregon, and Tacoma, Washington,
are testing RDF plants. Portland and
Roseburg, Oregon, and Cowlitz County,
Snohomish County, and King County,
Washington, are also studying the
feasibility of converting waste to energy
(Figure 26). The economics of recycled
materials are typically very good in the
Portland and Puget Sound areas, but
recycling programs in Idaho and Alaska
suffer from higher transportation costs.
Other wastes, which have potential for
recovery and at the same time present
serious disposal problems, include tires,
lubricating oil, and wood waste. Discarded
tires gradually work to the surface in a
landfill, where they trap water and become
a breeding place for mosquitos; and they
are a fire hazard. Recently, shredded tires
have been used as a fuel in boilers at the
Georgia-Pacific plywood mill in Toledo,
Oregon. Waste lubricating oil used on
roads as a dust suppressant can
contaminate air and water, and lead in the
oil makes indiscriminate burning or
disposal undesirable. Oregon recently
passed a Used Oil Collection Act,
providing for designated collection centers,
which will encourage re-refining of waste
oil. Wood waste, which can pollute water
resources and consume significant space
in landfills, is presently being used to
produce steam in several northwest timber
mills and utilities. It may also be used in
combination with refuse-derived fuel.
Hazardous Materials
The Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act mandates government control of
hazardous waste from its generation to
ultimate disposal, including a manifest
system and a permit system for treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities.
Compared to other parts of the country,
there are fewer industrial sources of
hazardous waste in Region 10. Most of it
is created by manufacturers of chemicals,
pesticides, and metals; petroleum
refineries; and electroplating operations.
These sources are concentrated around
Puget Sound and in the Willamette Valley.
In agricultural areas of the region, the
primary source of hazardous waste is
discarded pesticide containers.
24
-------
Figure 26.
Location of Hazardous Waste and
Recovery Sites in Region 10
CHEMICAL/WASTE OIL PROCESSORS
OPERATING CHEMICAL LAND FILLS
PROPOSED CHEMICAL LAND FILLS
CONSTRUCTED RDF PLANTS
ENERGY RECOVERY PLANT FEASIBILITY
STUDY UNDERWAY
WASTE EXCHANGES
LOCALITY WHERE RECYCLING FACILITY
AVAILABLE (MORE THAN ONE TYPE
HOUSEHOLD WASTE-GLASS. PAPER,
ALUMINUM, ETC.)
NOTE: State of Alaska is represented at
approximately 30% of true scale
COM J OKANOGAN
CLALLA
CHELAN
/'WHITMAN
\ r
o
' H< I
—B9^l THURSTON
• lewis o
YAKIMA ^
Mndleton J—i
i UMATILLA J* \
I
I oWonS
II (NOMAH
GILLIAM
WASCO

,\U>
ocyo
BANNO(
IA( KM IN
PHINE
'AYHl I
For RCRA to be effective, acceptable
waste disposal sites must be available.
There are two state-licensed chemical
landfills in Region 10 at Arlington, Oregon,
and Grandview, Idaho. A third has been
proposed on the U.S. Department of
Energy's Hanford Reservation in
Washington. The availability of such
landfills, coupled with the active
involvement of Region 10 states in
hazardous waste management, has helped
prevent serious incidents involving
hazardous wastes from occurring in the
Region. Nevertheless, there is opposition
to using these landfills to dispose of
wastes from out of state. In addition,
RCRA does not address the problem of
abandoned facilities, which have posed
serious health hazards elsewhere in the
country in several documented instances.
A national trust fund for cleanup of
abandoned sites has been proposed, and
an inventory of such sites is being
conducted.
Besides landfilling, there are several other
approaches taken to waste management in
the Northwest. Waste exchanges in
Portland and Seattle assist parties wishing
to dispose of a hazardous substance in
locating a second party that can use or
recycle the material, thereby eliminating a
need for disposal. The second party may
be a chemical processor that uses the
waste as feedstock for another product.
Regulations determine how some
substances are used; for instance, labeling
and disposal procedures have been
established for the more than 800 facilities
in Region 10 using or storing polychlorin-
ated biphenyl (PCB's), a highly toxic
substance used in electrical transformers
and capacitors. Some efforts have also
been made to rectify past uses of
hazardous substances. Each state in
Region 10 will participate in a voluntary
national program to reduce the exposure
of school children to asbestos fiber found
in older school buildings. In addition to
long-term management plans, emergency
response plans have been developed. Units
within several fire departments, including
Seattle and Tukwila, Washington, have
been trained to deal with incidents
involving hazardous materials.
25
-------
Radiation
As Figure 27 shows, every person is
exposed to radiation from naturally
occurring, inescapable sources like cosmic
rays and soil. Normally, less than half a
person's radiation exposure is man-made.
The data in Figure 28 are based on
national statistics, but are representative
for Region 10 as well.
Because the genetic and cancer-causing
effects of radiation are thought to be
additive or cumulative, the radiation dose
to individuals must be kept to the lowest
practicable level. EPA limits the radiation
Figure 27.
Average Amount of Exposure to Radiation,
Per Person Per Year
295
MAXIMUM EXPOSURE NOT TO EXCEED
170 MILLIREMS OVER AND ABOVE
NATURAL BACKGROUND AND
NECESSARY MEDICAL EXPOSURE.
250
AVERAGE U.S. CITIZEN S ANNUAL EXPOSURE,
IN MILLIREMS

INDUSTRIAL VARIOUS

NUCLEAR POWER 002

PRODUCTS 025
127
FALL-OUT 2
125
MEDICAIVDENTAL 20
105
NATURAL. COSMIC 45
60
NATURAL, TERRESTRIAL 60
dose to individuals and to the total
population by monitoring radiation and by
setting and enforcing regulations on
radioactivity in air, drinking water, surface
water, and waste materials, and from
nuclear power plants.
Pesticides
Pesticides are poisons for controlling
insects, weeds, or rodents. Improperly
used, they can harm other organisms
besides their target, causing illness or
death. The regulation of pesticides poses
some complex policy and technical issues.
Conventional chemical pesticides, by their
very nature, are hazardous; but they are
widely viewed as necessary to maintain
agricultural productivity. In addition, the
hazards of pesticides—especially the long-
term chronic effects—are difficult to
assess. The law that gives EPA authority
to regulate pesticides is the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA). Pesticide producers are inspected,
and they and their product must be
registered with EPA. Testing of pesticides
products, labeling for consumer use, and
annual reporting are also required of
manufacturers.
The EPA and state agencies work together
to regulate the manufacture and use of
pesticides. During 1979, EPA had
cooperative enforcement agreements with
the Idaho, Oregon, and Washington State
Departments of Agriculture. This means
that primary enforcement responsibilities
covering such things as fines, restricting
use, and suspending licenses, rest with the
state; but EPA can take further action if
warranted.
The major thrust of the FIFRA program is
directed toward pesticide users. Since
1976, EPA has worked with the states in
developing training and certification
programs. Applicators of restricted use
pesticides (pesticides with greater potential
for causing adverse effects) must be
certified to ensure that they are competent
in the use of these pesticides. EPA and
the states combine efforts to see that
pesticides are being used according to
label directions.
After pesticides are used, the Food and
Drug Administration is responsible for
checking that pesticide residues on raw
agricultural commodities are within
required limits.
Environmental monitoring for pesticides,
through the offices of EPA, is conducted
by certain state health departments
through EPA grants.
Pesticide registration and resulting use can
be discontinued at any time that EPA
determines that unreasonable adverse
effects outweigh the benefit from
continued use of the pesticide. If further
restricting use of the pesticide cannot
correct the problems, ultimately the
product can be cancelled or suspended.
For example EPA recently took emergency
action to suspend products containing
2,4,5-T and Silvex.
26
-------
Photo Credits
Cover (towerright)	Washington State Travel
Page 12 (lower)	Documerica
Page 19	Washington State Travel
Page 22	c. Bruce Forster, Portland, Oregon
Page 24	Documerica
-------